If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
I was asked what I saw; that's what I saw
I may be delusional, but that is what I saw. The interview is two hours long, and intense. And goes deep into all these subjects, any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs
Of course you could watch it and decide for yourself. But you prefer to watch the BBC and have them package it neatly for you, so you know what to think and believe
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
How? The nominations have closed.
Labour would probably rather Galloway win now wouldn’t they? Otherwise they’re lumbered with this bloke representing them, although I guess they could just not give him the whip
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
I would have thought if they were going to suspend him they would have done it by now .
It might depend on how much mileage this might have . If the right wing papers really go for it . His comments were bad but not sure they’d class as anti-Semitic .
I think you might be surprised just how many people think something dodgy went on re the IDF initial response .
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
As I pointed out the other day, making them illegal means that, under the sentencing guidelines you are in the High Culpability column.
Which means if your dog kills someone you can get 14 years - the sentencing *starts* at 8 years.
This will end with a number of people get the maximum.
It's not an effective solution to the problem at all, is it? Owners will still want to keep their dogs for whatever irrational reason (love of the animal, for protection/intimidation, for status, or simply because they don't like being told what to do by the state), people will still be attacked, maimed, and killed, and our prisons will continue to overflow with former dog owners at the tax payers expense.
It is something that could probably be red taped to something close to extinction. The public interest being to save these people from their own stupidity. The costs of enforcement are lower than the trauma and cost of treating injuries, and any subsequent jail sentences.
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
How? The nominations have closed.
Labour would probably rather Galloway win now wouldn’t they? Otherwise they’re lumbered with this bloke representing them, although I guess they could just not give him the whip
No, they'd rather their guy won.
They can drop him for the general election because Galloway is a cancer and needs to be stopped before he can mestatise.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
I meant something slightly different but, yes, there will be some of that in the mix too.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
As some people are pointing out, it's too late for Labour to drop Azhar Ali and replace him with another candidate. But Starmer needs to make clear he no longer has official support, the whip will be immediately withdrawn if elected, and he will not stand in the election.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
You can admire the creativity and talent . Not sure why anyone should dislike this or fear it . My problem is with the current Israeli government and IDF who are destroying Gaza and making it un-inhabitable .
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
Racism is often understandable but understanding it doesn't have to mean sharing it.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
You could also say Thanks
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
As I pointed out the other day, making them illegal means that, under the sentencing guidelines you are in the High Culpability column.
Which means if your dog kills someone you can get 14 years - the sentencing *starts* at 8 years.
This will end with a number of people get the maximum.
It's not an effective solution to the problem at all, is it? Owners will still want to keep their dogs for whatever irrational reason (love of the animal, for protection/intimidation, for status, or simply because they don't like being told what to do by the state), people will still be attacked, maimed, and killed, and our prisons will continue to overflow with former dog owners at the tax payers expense.
It won’t take many people going down for a decade before the enthusiasm for I Fought The Law drops off.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
You can admire the creativity and talent . Not sure why anyone should dislike this or fear it . My problem is with the current Israeli government and IDF who are destroying Gaza and making it un-inhabitable .
You can support the concept of 'Israel' as a homeland for Jews, without supporting what Bibi and Likud are doing at the moment.
But also, it is undeniable that some on the other side (and not just Hamas) would love to do the same to Israel. As we saw on October 7th.
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
How? The nominations have closed.
Labour would probably rather Galloway win now wouldn’t they? Otherwise they’re lumbered with this bloke representing them, although I guess they could just not give him the whip
GE24 is happening this year so I expect if he wins he will lose the whip and be replaced with Paul Waugh
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
As I pointed out the other day, making them illegal means that, under the sentencing guidelines you are in the High Culpability column.
Which means if your dog kills someone you can get 14 years - the sentencing *starts* at 8 years.
This will end with a number of people get the maximum.
It's not an effective solution to the problem at all, is it? Owners will still want to keep their dogs for whatever irrational reason (love of the animal, for protection/intimidation, for status, or simply because they don't like being told what to do by the state), people will still be attacked, maimed, and killed, and our prisons will continue to overflow with former dog owners at the tax payers expense.
It is something that could probably be red taped to something close to extinction. The public interest being to save these people from their own stupidity. The costs of enforcement are lower than the trauma and cost of treating injuries, and any subsequent jail sentences.
I've no doubt that is what the law intended. The costs of enforcement being lower assumes the law is effective at getting dangerous dogs out of circulation and effective as a deterrent to owners. We will have to wait and see. Meantime, attacks are continuing on an alarmingly regular basis. Or maybe they are just being reported more frequently.
I'm just questioning whether the law will achieve what is intended, in the most cost effective way.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
You could also say Thanks
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
Thanks for showing how little you knew before you saw the interview,
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
As I pointed out the other day, making them illegal means that, under the sentencing guidelines you are in the High Culpability column.
Which means if your dog kills someone you can get 14 years - the sentencing *starts* at 8 years.
This will end with a number of people get the maximum.
It's not an effective solution to the problem at all, is it? Owners will still want to keep their dogs for whatever irrational reason (love of the animal, for protection/intimidation, for status, or simply because they don't like being told what to do by the state), people will still be attacked, maimed, and killed, and our prisons will continue to overflow with former dog owners at the tax payers expense.
It won’t take many people going down for a decade before the enthusiasm for I Fought The Law drops off.
Yes, absolutely
A few deterrent sentences - 12 years in chokey - and the problem will miraculously vanish
Personally I can"t be arsed to watch 2 hours of an interview with anyone. I watched a highlights video. I might have a longer version on in the background at some point. I don't think we can really see watching the whole thing all the wsy through as tbe yardstick of success for the initiative. But maybe I'm wrong.
And of course, a 'view', even a real one by a real person for the whole video doesn't mean anything.
There is a flat earther [1] called Nathan Oakley (shouldn't give him publicity really even mentioning him), who posts a daily video on YouTube. It gets less than 1,000 'views'.
Most of those views are bots, and the genuine ones, at least half of them are from scientists who then take pieces from his video to debunk them.
A YouTube view is meaningless. It tells you nothing about whether there is a person watching the video or not, and it tells you nothing about whether the person (if there are any) watching is for or against the video.
Not true
A view means someone has 1. absorbed some of Putin's take on history and politics, and 2. added to Carlson's self-curated persona as maybe the most watched TV interviewer on the planet
All that is true even if you come way from the video thinking Putin is a nasty criminal and Carlson a narcissistic nincompoop (both arguable positions)
There is no way of knowing if the view was by a human or not, and given the person being interviewed I assume at least one of them is a bot. I don't have a problem with you watching it nor with your enthusiasm for it. But I'm not sure the stats are true nor additive.
This crops up a lot on the internet. I don't think we've really got to grips with it yet in terms of numbers.
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
The owners, or the dogs? (Or both?)
both would be fine by me
A good piece by Dom Cummings' wife about how she changed her mind about XL Bullies. She was pro Bully and anti-ban, until her young and only child met one on the Tube. Unmuzzled
You really do have to see these monsters in the flesh to see how dangerous they are
I also didn't realise the stupid owner of those dogs in Jaywick has now said THIS:
"Oddly, in all the arguments for and against XL Bullys over the past week, the person I’ve found most sensible is Ashley Warren, owner of the killer dogs. ‘I did not know Bullys were aggressive, I didn’t believe all this stuff,’ he said. ‘But now I’ve learned the hard way. I honestly thought the ban was a stupid government plan to wipe out a breed which I had never seen anything but softness and love from. Now I think they need to be wiped out.’"
Get on with it
What would it take to wipe them out?
A massive expansion of council dog warden services? Extra police officers? Armed dog wardens? Drones to hunt them out in people's back gardens? Prison for their owners if they didn't comply?
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
Being narrow/closed minded can be more dangerous than being thick.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
{Edward Said has entered the chat}
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
How? The nominations have closed.
Labour would probably rather Galloway win now wouldn’t they? Otherwise they’re lumbered with this bloke representing them, although I guess they could just not give him the whip
GE24 is happening this year so I expect if he wins he will lose the whip and be replaced with Paul Waugh
Sir Keir has staked a lot on having changed the Labour Party, so he will almost certainly give this guy the short shrift. That will alienate the Muslim vote though, which is already wobbling
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
Ah yes let's categorise people and countries and make general, sweeping and unsubstantiated claims about their skills and characteristics
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Putin's Musk love is interesting. It certainly isn't friendship, but Putin seems to think Musk to be potentially the most useful American to Russia and worth cultivating.
The other main takeaway is that Putin has no intention of stopping or slowing his war against Ukraine but we should know that anyway, and it's not particularly on message for Carlson's agenda.
Labour 'set to suspend' Rochdale candidate despite grovelling apology to Israel supporters. Labour in chaos, accused of 'throwing' campaign to avoid fallout if they lose to Galloway...
Yes I know its Skwawkbox but can't see how SKS can do anything else as the BOD demand his head on a plate.
I placed a bet on GG at 4/1 as the news broke yesterday
How dare Labour suspend antisemitic conspiracy theorists as party members? Don’t they know the party’s meant to be a haven for racists and weirdos?
(A more pertinent question would be, why did they pick the silly sod in the first place?)
Ali is a former council leader and head of the Labour group on Lancashire County Council. The original allegation, which I described yesterday as tenuous, was that Ali had been on the committee of a mosque that had recently hosted radical speakers. The Jewish Chronicle reported this but did not splash it. It also mentioned that a Muslim site complained that Ali had been a government anti-terrorism adviser and therefore not Islamist. https://www.thejc.com/lets-talk/why-has-labours-rochdale-candidate-fundraised-for-a-mosque-that-hosted-extremists-ln6owl6f
Since then, the Mail reports a recording of Ali, well:-
So it seems the panel made a logical decision at the time and Ali said something stupid since.
In which case, fair enough to Labour. They were unlucky.
But I can't see how he survives saying it. Even our own resident antisemites don't suggest Israel deliberately allowed 7th October, although the more we know the more spectacular the failure of the Israeli government under Netanyahu looks.
Tony Lloyd wasn’t even dead when he made these statements.
Labour have screwed up with the selection.
BJO’s statement on Luke Akehurst is a fact, it is hardly anti semitic.
Leaving aside, for the moment, the fact that he got the organisations Akehurst is associated with wrong, the statement said that he was paid lobbyist of the Israelis by firm implication, The Israeli government.
Is this a fact? It doesn’t look like it from what I can see.
There are no positions you can take on this and most Middle East issues without being open to accusations of being pro slaughter.
There are.
Well, if really believe that you’ve adopted such a position there seems barely more point in reasoning with you than there would be with Trump.
My idea for the Israel/Palestine issue involves no slaughter.
Yes, it is a bit mad. And very expensive. But it doesn’t depend on dead people. And it would actually fix the problem for a reasonable value of permanent.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
{Edward Said has entered the chat}
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
It is true that we expect better of democracies than of death cults masquerading as governments.
Unfortunately, that just means we get disappointed more often.
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
As I pointed out the other day, making them illegal means that, under the sentencing guidelines you are in the High Culpability column.
Which means if your dog kills someone you can get 14 years - the sentencing *starts* at 8 years.
This will end with a number of people get the maximum.
It's not an effective solution to the problem at all, is it? Owners will still want to keep their dogs for whatever irrational reason (love of the animal, for protection/intimidation, for status, or simply because they don't like being told what to do by the state), people will still be attacked, maimed, and killed, and our prisons will continue to overflow with former dog owners at the tax payers expense.
It won’t take many people going down for a decade before the enthusiasm for I Fought The Law drops off.
Rebecca Clancy, who has been F1 correspondent of The Times for the last seven years is standing down and has written a valedictory article, and well Sir Lewis Hamilton confirms his awesomeness.
There is no doubt that this is a world dominated by men. In 2021, just before the penultimate race in Saudi Arabia, I had brunch with Sir Lewis Hamilton and a few other Fleet Street colleagues in London. I’ve always had a good relationship with Hamilton. I find him polite and engaging and he always looks you in the eye when he answers your questions.
At this brunch, we were chatting about F1, and Hamilton, who has regularly spoken about the lack of diversity in the sport, turned to me and said: “Rebecca, there’s something I wanted to ask you. What’s it like being a woman in F1?” I told him I never felt I was treated any differently, which I didn’t.
However, I did mention that I was heading to Saudi Arabia the next day and was slightly hesitant about it because at the media hotel women weren’t allowed to use the pool or the gym. The next day, an email was sent to all media which said women would have the same access to the hotel facilities as the men. Hamilton had had a word.
XL Bully owners in open rebellion on my local Facebook page. People posting photos of puppies, arranging meet-ups in parks, taking off muzzles, "our babies". There also seems to be a trend of people owning four or five.
I don't think this is over.
It will end with the government forcibly euthanising them
The owners, or the dogs? (Or both?)
both would be fine by me
A good piece by Dom Cummings' wife about how she changed her mind about XL Bullies. She was pro Bully and anti-ban, until her young and only child met one on the Tube. Unmuzzled
You really do have to see these monsters in the flesh to see how dangerous they are
I also didn't realise the stupid owner of those dogs in Jaywick has now said THIS:
"Oddly, in all the arguments for and against XL Bullys over the past week, the person I’ve found most sensible is Ashley Warren, owner of the killer dogs. ‘I did not know Bullys were aggressive, I didn’t believe all this stuff,’ he said. ‘But now I’ve learned the hard way. I honestly thought the ban was a stupid government plan to wipe out a breed which I had never seen anything but softness and love from. Now I think they need to be wiped out.’"
Get on with it
What would it take to wipe them out?
A massive expansion of council dog warden services? Extra police officers? Armed dog wardens? Drones to hunt them out in people's back gardens? Prison for their owners if they didn't comply?
One pop-up restaurant in Shoreditch should do the trick.
Cheeses for sure but it's not just cheese. You can go to the biggest supermarket in France and they'll only sell melons for half the year. They have such a thing as 'out of season' which I don't remember in the UK for about 30 years
Cheeses for sure but it's not just cheese. You can go to the biggest supermarket in France and they'll only sell melons for half the year. They have such a thing as 'out of season' which I don't remember in the UK for about 30 years
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
Being narrow/closed minded can be more dangerous than being thick.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
Yes, that's a good point, and yes, Putin is possibly quite narrow minded, or at least so obsessional it damages his rational thinking, even though he has a good brain
Indeed that is surely what happened in Ukraine. He is so obsessed with Ukraine being this non-country, and basically and emotionally an integral part of Russia, he convinced himself the country would fold immediately, and welcome the embrace of Moscow
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
I would have thought if they were going to suspend him they would have done it by now .
It might depend on how much mileage this might have . If the right wing papers really go for it . His comments were bad but not sure they’d class as anti-Semitic .
I think you might be surprised just how many people think something dodgy went on re the IDF initial response .
I believe he is on the ballot and therefore could not be removed. They could remove the whip and replace him at the GE, but I expect they will just play it by ear and see how it goes.
As you suggest, it may be that the effect of his remarks are not proving as catastrophic as some would like.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
For a start, it screws up Trump's plan of having him invade Britain, Germany and possibly France.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
You can admire the creativity and talent . Not sure why anyone should dislike this or fear it . My problem is with the current Israeli government and IDF who are destroying Gaza and making it un-inhabitable .
People who are more successful are often resented.
People who seem to be 'different' are often resented.
People who seem 'different' who are more successful are very often resented.
Cheeses for sure but it's not just cheese. You can go to the biggest supermarket in France and they'll only sell melons for half the year. They have such a thing as 'out of season' which I don't remember in the UK for about 30 years
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
I would have thought if they were going to suspend him they would have done it by now .
It might depend on how much mileage this might have . If the right wing papers really go for it . His comments were bad but not sure they’d class as anti-Semitic .
I think you might be surprised just how many people think something dodgy went on re the IDF initial response .
I believe he is on the ballot and therefore could not be removed. They could remove the whip and replace him at the GE, but I expect they will just play it by ear and see how it goes.
As you suggest, it may be that the effect of his remarks are not proving as catastrophic as some would like.
Edit: Hat tip to Frank Booth who drew attention to Galloway's price last night. It was 9/2 then; it's in to 9/4 now.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Putin's Musk love is interesting. It certainly isn't friendship, but Putin seems to think Musk to be potentially the most useful American to Russia and worth cultivating.
The other main takeaway is that Putin has no intention of stopping or slowing his war against Ukraine but we should know that anyway, and it's not particularly on message for Carlson's agenda.
And also that Putin likely has no wider ambitions in contrast to what we are told by our media.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
Perhaps you should go over there to prove English right wing hacks can do sycophancy just as well as an American right-wing hack.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
For a start, it screws up Trump's plan of having him invade Britain, Germany and possibly France.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
You could also say Thanks
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
Thanks for showing how little you knew before you saw the interview,
Sigh
I guess that will have to do
BTW if you want to watch one bit of it, that is truly interesting, then I'd go for the China stuff
At one point he says "What choice do we have, we have a X000 km border with them, we have to live with them, we have co-existed for centuries" - and he looks resigned and uneasy as he says it
And when he talks of China's economic rise it is with a certain relish that they are overtaking the West, but also a certain fear that they are utterly eclipsing Russia. It is very telling. It is not the brotherly love he likes to portray with Xi
The long term problem of Labour distancing themselves from a Muslim candidate who is saying what a lot of Muslims believe, is that it increases the likelihood of an Islamic Party becoming a force in British politics.
It’s inevitable anyway, but this will speed it up. When it was just a faction of the Labour Party it could be contained, but without that moderating force all sorts could be on the cards
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Putin's Musk love is interesting. It certainly isn't friendship, but Putin seems to think Musk to be potentially the most useful American to Russia and worth cultivating.
The other main takeaway is that Putin has no intention of stopping or slowing his war against Ukraine but we should know that anyway, and it's not particularly on message for Carlson's agenda.
And also that Putin likely has no wider ambitions in contrast to what we are told by our media.
Like he had no ambition to conquer Ukraine in 2014?
We have come a long way in 60 years. Then it was valium.
"Kids are different today," I hear ev'ry mother say Mother needs something today to calm her down And though she's not really ill There's a little yellow pill She goes running for the shelter of a mother's little helper And it helps her on her way Gets her through her busy day https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-zxBNz3XbM
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
I would have thought if they were going to suspend him they would have done it by now .
It might depend on how much mileage this might have . If the right wing papers really go for it . His comments were bad but not sure they’d class as anti-Semitic .
I think you might be surprised just how many people think something dodgy went on re the IDF initial response .
I believe he is on the ballot and therefore could not be removed. They could remove the whip and replace him at the GE, but I expect they will just play it by ear and see how it goes.
As you suggest, it may be that the effect of his remarks are not proving as catastrophic as some would like.
Edit: Hat tip to Frank Booth who drew attention to Galloway's price last night. It was 9/2 then; it's in to 9/4 now.
Shows that on thin markets like this maybe Betfair exchange isn’t the place to look; GG was still 4/1 on there when the bookies had moved. Now it’s less than 5/2
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Except, of course, I actually said:
"6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that"
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
I was asked what I saw; that's what I saw
I may be delusional, but that is what I saw. The interview is two hours long, and intense. And goes deep into all these subjects, any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs
Of course you could watch it and decide for yourself. But you prefer to watch the BBC and have them package it neatly for you, so you know what to think and believe
Noone can deny that in many ways Putin is brilliant in his own way. He may not be to our taste but he is what he is.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
{Edward Said has entered the chat}
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
I think that is at least a touch disingenuous or perhaps even projecting. The reason people don't expect some of the Arab players to behave 'correctly' whilst at the same time they do expect such from Israel is because so many of the parties on the Arab side are either non Governmental or represent failed states (though why those states have failed and the part Western countries have played in those failures is another important debate)
We do not expect Hamas or Hezbollah to adhere to conventions (no matter how much we might wish they would) because that is not the nature of those groups. We are also unsurpised when Syria or Iraq struggle to adhere to the accepted behaviour of states given how slightly they even cling to notions of statehood and how fractured they are (again not least because of the actions of the West post WW1).
But we do expect the relatively stable countirs like Jordan and Egypt to adhere to the conventions as we perceve them as, to a greater or lesser extent, stable. We would be far more surprised and disapointed if Jordan were to behave as Israel does than if Syria were to do so. Both neighbouring Arab counties but with very different recent histories.
I don't consider this to be 'racism of low expectations'. Just an acceptance that the recent history and nature of these countries (by which I mean their artificially fragmented nature) makes it more likely they will fail in our expectations.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
Being narrow/closed minded can be more dangerous than being thick.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
Yes, that's a good point, and yes, Putin is possibly quite narrow minded, or at least so obsessional it damages his rational thinking, even though he has a good brain
Indeed that is surely what happened in Ukraine. He is so obsessed with Ukraine being this non-country, and basically and emotionally an integral part of Russia, he convinced himself the country would fold immediately, and welcome the embrace of Moscow
Vlad, you fucked up
He got high on his own supply.
Mind you, before the invasion, a number of Ukrainians in high positions were approached by Russian intelligence. Nearly all reported the approaches to the Ukrainian government which then played a double game.
This was a big contributor to the failure of the initial Russian assault.
But the apparent success of the approaches might have given the Russians the idea they were pushing at an open door.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
You could also say Thanks
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
Thanks for showing how little you knew before you saw the interview,
Sigh
I guess that will have to do
BTW if you want to watch one bit of it, that is truly interesting, then I'd go for the China stuff
At one point he says "What choice do we have, we have a X000 km border with them, we have to live with them, we have co-existed for centuries" - and he looks resigned and uneasy as he says it
And when he talks of China's economic rise it is with a certain relish that they are overtaking the West, but also a certain fear that they are utterly eclipsing Russia. It is very telling. It is not the brotherly love he likes to portray with Xi
This invasion has made Putin Xi's bitch from now on.
It's wrecked his military, turned his soft allies in Europe away from him, screwed his reputation and created a wasteland on his western border.
That means his trade from now on will have to be to the East. To China.
China will not be supplicants as Germany were. China offers no easy territorial gains. China cares about itself, not about the balance of the wider world.
That means it is not at all a comfortable place for him to be.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Except, of course, I actually said:
"6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that"
Tiresome
Yes you "get the sense". Obviously nobody (not even you) can guarantee it.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
Darth Putin isn't saying Putin's thick; it's taking the p*ss out of him. That's a difference.
And BTW, I've said on here many times that launching the Ukraine war wasn't stupid; it was a gamble, and one that nearly paid off. Hopefully he lays awake at night wondering "what if..."
As for Putin and China: he'll know well that the last significant conflict between their countries occurred in 1969, and knows that Xi is an expansionist leader.
That interview. The relevant context is that the Trump neo-fascists are pro Russia and anti-NATO. 2 hours of fawning as a preface for Trump asking Putin to do what he likes to Europe.
But obviously, they have to vote for the guy with dementia because the other guy has dementia.
Complaints about European freeloading on defence have been a consistent theme from both parties in the US long before Trump. Trump has just expressed the same point more colourfully.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
{Edward Said has entered the chat}
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
There's no doubt that the events of Oct. 7th were appalling, and one can well understand the Israeli response. However as I posted earlier, the actions of the IDF and the Israeli government are exhausting the sympathies many ..... most of us? ..... had. I wonder sometimes if the actions of the IDF and the Israeli government are partly motivated by a sense of guilt for not having heeded the warnings alleged (at least) to have been available. Anyway, where are the poor hostages? They seem to have been largely forgotten. Except, of course, by their friends and relatives.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
Fine by me, but you'll have to run it by Smithson Junior, as he was the one who kicked off this debate yesterday by saying I had been proven wrong and Tucker Putin was a flop, a disaster, no one watched it, which, as we now know, is shite
Otherwise, yes, let's move on
Tho there is that really weird moment at about 1 hour 32 in the interview.... but I want to turn that into a Gazette piece so mum's the word!
I'm looking forward to the major Hollywood movie 30 years later being nominated for 5 Oscars, like Frost/Nixon.
Carlson/Putin. Should be riveting.
The one interesting thing about this amongst the Leon dullness is no-one is speculating that Putin is not at death's door or about to be deposed anymore.
Plus more dissonance about the MAGA types being traitors.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
I was asked what I saw; that's what I saw
I may be delusional, but that is what I saw. The interview is two hours long, and intense. And goes deep into all these subjects, any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs
Of course you could watch it and decide for yourself. But you prefer to watch the BBC and have them package it neatly for you, so you know what to think and believe
Noone can deny that in many ways Putin is brilliant in his own way. He may not be to our taste but he is what he is.
He resembles Stalin in many ways, and not just in being a genocidal lunatic whom everybody thought of as a grey mediocrity.
He's a consummate survivor, a cunning manipulator, an arch-plotter and a ruthless eliminator of rivals.
What he doesn't have is the same power base as Stalin. In the 1940s the Soviet army was well equipped with modern weaponry, partly their own and partly from Lend Lease, and very large. It also had had an excuse to project its power across Eastern Europe. Finally, in the days before the internet Stalin was clever at hiding his crimes, while in Ukraine they're happening in plain site.
But - equally - Putin either has, or is about to, go past Stalin as the Russian Empire's longest serving leader since Alexander II in 1881, although Mikhail Romanov's 32 years looks a stretch.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
You could also say Thanks
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
Thanks for showing how little you knew before you saw the interview,
Sigh
I guess that will have to do
BTW if you want to watch one bit of it, that is truly interesting, then I'd go for the China stuff
At one point he says "What choice do we have, we have a X000 km border with them, we have to live with them, we have co-existed for centuries" - and he looks resigned and uneasy as he says it
And when he talks of China's economic rise it is with a certain relish that they are overtaking the West, but also a certain fear that they are utterly eclipsing Russia. It is very telling. It is not the brotherly love he likes to portray with Xi
This invasion has made Putin Xi's bitch from now on.
It's wrecked his military, turned his soft allies in Europe away from him, screwed his reputation and created a wasteland on his western border.
That means his trade from now on will have to be to the East. To China.
China will not be supplicants as Germany were. China offers no easy territorial gains. China cares about itself, not about the balance of the wider world.
That means it is not at all a comfortable place for him to be.
Yes, absolutely, and you can actually SEE the discomfort in his body language. He faintly squirms, talking about China, like someone physically trapped, and his subsquent warmer words about Russo-Chinese trade are uncovincing. He doesn't want to be China's junior: but he is
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
I was asked what I saw; that's what I saw
I may be delusional, but that is what I saw. The interview is two hours long, and intense. And goes deep into all these subjects, any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs
Of course you could watch it and decide for yourself. But you prefer to watch the BBC and have them package it neatly for you, so you know what to think and believe
Noone can deny that in many ways Putin is brilliant in his own way. He may not be to our taste but he is what he is.
But the nature of the "is" is key. Ted Bundy was good at what he did.
That interview. The relevant context is that the Trump neo-fascists are pro Russia and anti-NATO. 2 hours of fawning as a preface for Trump asking Putin to do what he likes to Europe.
But obviously, they have to vote for the guy with dementia because the other guy has dementia.
Trump also suggested it would be a good thing if Putin attacked NATO countries which weren't spending enough on defence.
It's that 'art of the deal' schtick again. Donald Trump the big big man who intimidates and runs rings round everybody by being incredibly smart and tough. Manhattan real estate, big ticket geopolitics, it makes no difference. Always 'winning'. Always 'beating' people. It's infantile but one of his most effective lines of appeal. Most of his supporters are quite simple people and they buy it.
I don't want to be 'pro-Trump', but one way of looking at this is that it is selling NATO to his followers. It sets out a vision. Obviously though it is flawed, because some countries are more at risk of attack than others, in many cases however there is a strategic interest in having them in the alliance, despite the relatively low GDP contibution, but that line of thinking is a bit too complex in this type of debate. As a general principle the 'NATO as a protectorate' idea is pretty sound and better than it being a fading legacy of the cold war with people being uncertain about what it is.
You're being far too generous. He's selling his one and only product - himself. As for what he'd do on NATO if he gets back, I honestly don't know. He might trash it or then again he might not. It's a risk (along with many others) that he alone brings and like all the others it skews heavily to the downside. Trump Risk we can call it. It merits its own category. If people want to avoid it (which is the rational choice) they know what to do.
I think that you are overplaying the idea that the current situation is 'safe' or 'stable'. I think that there is a sense of false reassurance that the democrats are 'sane, rational' as they seem to be a continuation of familiar times, against the 'madness and chaos' of Trump. But if you look at what went on in Afghanistan, Ukraine and Israel, it has been mad and chaotic - an unforced panic driven Saigon style evacuation, and then an endless part funded trench war with no end in sight, Israel seemingly out of control in Gaza. Trump by contrast avoided conflicts for 4 years. So it is difficult to see the risk being higher with Trump. There are a lot of reasons not to vote for him but I am not persuaded by the NATO argument. I think the vision amongst Trump advisors of NATO becoming a European protectorate with US involvement scaled back is one that is potentially positive in the sense that, whilst not ideal, it is durable and sustainable, unlike the current situation.
That interview. The relevant context is that the Trump neo-fascists are pro Russia and anti-NATO. 2 hours of fawning as a preface for Trump asking Putin to do what he likes to Europe.
But obviously, they have to vote for the guy with dementia because the other guy has dementia.
Complaints about European freeloading on defence have been a consistent theme from both parties in the US long before Trump. Trump has just expressed the same point more colourfully.
Trump did an excellent Biden impression yesterday though so maybe we should elect him for that.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
Many brilliant Jews is correct.
Hardly any of them Zionists
Being anti zionist is a protected characteristic thanks to the recent Bristol University case being antisemitic rightly is not.
I find pro Israel supporters are mostly unable to understand the difference which in itself is antisemitic
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Well, VVP has 20% of Ukraine after 10 years of trying so he can want what the fuck he wants but there are no means to get it.
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
That interview. The relevant context is that the Trump neo-fascists are pro Russia and anti-NATO. 2 hours of fawning as a preface for Trump asking Putin to do what he likes to Europe.
But obviously, they have to vote for the guy with dementia because the other guy has dementia.
Complaints about European freeloading on defence have been a consistent theme from both parties in the US long before Trump. Trump has just expressed the same point more colourfully.
Trump did an excellent Biden impression yesterday though so maybe we should elect him for that.
In what way? Who's he muddled up this time? Hopefully not his daughter and his wife again...*
*to clarify - so far as I know Biden has never yet done this.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Except, of course, I actually said:
"6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that"
Tiresome
Yes you "get the sense". Obviously nobody (not even you) can guarantee it.
How many minutes is it since Leon said " any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs" ?
(Community Note: Putin worked as a KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years, rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel)
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
I'm sorry? What???
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
Being narrow/closed minded can be more dangerous than being thick.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
Yes, that's a good point, and yes, Putin is possibly quite narrow minded, or at least so obsessional it damages his rational thinking, even though he has a good brain
Indeed that is surely what happened in Ukraine. He is so obsessed with Ukraine being this non-country, and basically and emotionally an integral part of Russia, he convinced himself the country would fold immediately, and welcome the embrace of Moscow
Vlad, you fucked up
We also don't talk enough about the constant rearguard action every dictator is making to prevent his terminal removal by one faction or another.
It is now a couple of years since that monumental fuck-up at the start of the Ukraine invasion (and more than a decade since the proxy war in Ukraine got bogged down) and Putin is still in post. That is a major, ongoing success for him.
We are only looking at this from a Western perspective, and rarely think about the position in the Kremlin.
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
I would have thought if they were going to suspend him they would have done it by now .
It might depend on how much mileage this might have . If the right wing papers really go for it . His comments were bad but not sure they’d class as anti-Semitic .
I think you might be surprised just how many people think something dodgy went on re the IDF initial response .
I believe he is on the ballot and therefore could not be removed. They could remove the whip and replace him at the GE, but I expect they will just play it by ear and see how it goes.
As you suggest, it may be that the effect of his remarks are not proving as catastrophic as some would like.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews accept by their comments that he can’t be removed now . I wouldn’t class what he said as anti-Semitic .
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
Racism is often understandable but understanding it doesn't have to mean sharing it.
Yet racism can be tolerated when it involves hatred of Jews.
To the western world Arabs are little more than a source of continual geopolitical crisis.
Something which leads to oil price rises, terrorist attacks and refugees.
If the Arab world ever got its act together and sorted out its problems then few in the western world would think about them beyond considering them as a possible holiday destination.
The Arab world is the equivalent of an extended family living along a nearby street. Some seem okay but there's always problems at one house or another. Israel is a house on the same street but with a different family.
Cheeses for sure but it's not just cheese. You can go to the biggest supermarket in France and they'll only sell melons for half the year. They have such a thing as 'out of season' which I don't remember in the UK for about 30 years
I quite like the idea of seasonal food. The looking forward to it. It somehow seems to taste nicer when you wait for it. It is odd that we enjoy looking forward to special food when it comes to Christmas, Easter, Halloween, Bonfire night, etc (some of which are seasonal and some aren't), yet we have to have everything else all year around. From my fruit crop I enjoy making summer pudding in the summer, Tarte Tatin in the Autumn, first crop of Rhubarb in March, etc, although I do freeze a lot of it. There is also the joy of making marmalade in January and sloe gin in the Autumn even if you are not consuming them then. To me we have lost something by being able to get raspberries, for instance, all year around.
That interview. The relevant context is that the Trump neo-fascists are pro Russia and anti-NATO. 2 hours of fawning as a preface for Trump asking Putin to do what he likes to Europe.
But obviously, they have to vote for the guy with dementia because the other guy has dementia.
Complaints about European freeloading on defence have been a consistent theme from both parties in the US long before Trump. Trump has just expressed the same point more colourfully.
Your continued attempts at giving Trump a free pass on many of his words and actions is deeply troubling .
I've just seen a clip of Gavin Newsom being interviewed about the election campaign. I didn't really know who he was until this morning - other than being a Democrat whose odds are pretty short to be the Democratic POTUS nominee. I now know he is Governor of California, articulate, likeable and photogenic. He is 9-9.6 on Betfair for the nomination and 14.5-15 for the Presidency.
The NYT article suggests Biden should step aside at the DNC convention and not endorse any particular individual to replace him. The betting suggests Newsom is best placed if that happens. There is no evidence Michelle Obama wants the gig and she doesn't hold any political office. Harris appears to be not popular enough. I like Whitmer but I don't think she is popular enough either?
So why not Newsom? Anyone know how he matches up against Trump in the polls?
"The NYT article" is an opinion piece by Douthat, a Republican. What he wants to do is to damage Joe Biden, the Democratic president, and Kamala Harris, the Democratic VP who would almost definitely get the nomination if Joe Biden decided not to run. His specific suggestion, which I'm intended to be totally helpful, is that Biden retire but not endorse Kamala Harris and leave it to convention floor votes to decide, which would likely result in Kamala Harris getting the nomination anyhow. At this point Douthat would write a column about how the Democratic VP didn't have the confidence of the president she'd just been serving under.
Yes, but you literally believe "the New York Times doesn't particularly mind if Trump wins because he's great for their business"
So I think it's best if 1. we ignore you on this point and/or 2. perhaps you should talk about something else?
'Yes but' I'll ignore the point you just made and talk about something else. You can argue with edmundintokyo about what the NYT 'believes' as much as you like, but it's irrelevant.
What matters is what they publish, and your assertion that it's comparable to the way in which the Telegraph operates is simply risible.
Er, @edmundintokyo is talking about the New York Times, in the comment to which I respond, but he has just asserted that "the New York Times doesn't particularly mind if Trump wins because he's great for their business", which is a clearly insane statement, rendering all his opinions on the NYT worthless (and you seem to agree with him, in part?)
It's like if I started blatting on about rugby. and claimed the All Blacks generally try to lose; you'd stop listening to me about rugby, and rightly so
"The NYT opinion piece is by a Republican" is what you loudly ignored by going ad hom.
We have come a long way in 60 years. Then it was valium.
"Kids are different today," I hear ev'ry mother say Mother needs something today to calm her down And though she's not really ill There's a little yellow pill She goes running for the shelter of a mother's little helper And it helps her on her way Gets her through her busy day https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-zxBNz3XbM
Although, of course, the implication behind MLH was that middle-aged people were scoring their stuff free on the NHS while innocent kidz like Mick'n'Keef were getting busted for dope. Still a great song, though.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Well, VVP has 20% of Ukraine after 10 years of trying so he can want what the fuck he wants but there are no means to get it.
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
Plenty of irredentism about. That’s why it has its own section in the OED.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
You could also say Thanks
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
I'm grateful you saved me the effort, so thanks. Nothing particularly new, but well worth a précis.
Was Donald Trump advising Pakistan's military on election rigging strategies?
To ban a party, imprison their leader, disenfranchise its voters through dirty tricks and still have your favoured candidate come a very distant second is almost impressive.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Gosh. You're like George Bush. You saw into his soul.
None of that was really new, either; not to anyone who pays attention. I don't think I've ever seen anyone call Putin thick, for instance.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Except, of course, I actually said:
"6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that"
Tiresome
Yes you "get the sense". Obviously nobody (not even you) can guarantee it.
How many minutes is it since Leon said " any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs" ?
(Community Note: Putin worked as a KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years, rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel)
All over the shop.
Putin is really not a brilliant actor. He didn’t rise up the KGB because of his debonair acting skills
I’m surprised Carlson didn’t get down and blow Putin .
And that’s the same for much of the GOP who are treasonous scum .
It's worth reminding ourselves - and the Americans - that this arsehole sprayed Novichok around Salisbury. Still surprised at how restrained the UK Gov was at the time.
British weapons have now killed thousand of Russian soldiers. We have had payback.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
{Edward Said has entered the chat}
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
I think that is at least a touch disingenuous or perhaps even projecting. The reason people don't expect some of the Arab players to behave 'correctly' whilst at the same time they do expect such from Israel is because so many of the parties on the Arab side are either non Governmental or represent failed states (though why those states have failed and the part Western countries have played in those failures is another important debate)
We do not expect Hamas or Hezbollah to adhere to conventions (no matter how much we might wish they would) because that is not the nature of those groups. We are also unsurpised when Syria or Iraq struggle to adhere to the accepted behaviour of states given how slightly they even cling to notions of statehood and how fractured they are (again not least because of the actions of the West post WW1).
But we do expect the relatively stable countirs like Jordan and Egypt to adhere to the conventions as we perceve them as, to a greater or lesser extent, stable. We would be far more surprised and disapointed if Jordan were to behave as Israel does than if Syria were to do so. Both neighbouring Arab counties but with very different recent histories.
I don't consider this to be 'racism of low expectations'. Just an acceptance that the recent history and nature of these countries (by which I mean their artificially fragmented nature) makes it more likely they will fail in our expectations.
Liked, but wanted to add what an excellent post that is. It is the very reason why we should expect different levels of behaviour from Hamas and Israel. The word expect is the important one and not condone, but because we 'expect' we can be more disappointed when those expectations are not met.
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
Etymology isn't a trump (hah!) card: consider the Scottish Borders or the Netherlands.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
I think there is a racism of low expectations towards Arabs by many in the Western media. They are not expected to exhibit civilised behaviour, while it is expected from Israel, hence the asymmetry of outrage at Hamas atrocities and the IDF ones.
{Edward Said has entered the chat}
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
There's no doubt that the events of Oct. 7th were appalling, and one can well understand the Israeli response. However as I posted earlier, the actions of the IDF and the Israeli government are exhausting the sympathies many ..... most of us? ..... had. I wonder sometimes if the actions of the IDF and the Israeli government are partly motivated by a sense of guilt for not having heeded the warnings alleged (at least) to have been available. Anyway, where are the poor hostages? They seem to have been largely forgotten. Except, of course, by their friends and relatives.
I suspect the Israeli government (especially Likud) and the military (especially intelligence agencies) are motivated by two things:
1) A desire to seize Gaza, preferably minus its population, so they can incorporate it and the West Bank into Israel in fulfilment of the 'facts on the ground' strategy;
2) An urgent need to avoid stopping the war short of that as if they do, all of them will be in serious trouble for the fuckup at the start and several of them might well end up in prison (if not for this, then for the many other crimes they have committed).
The hostages are probably considered expendable to that end. Heck, the Israelis managed to shoot three of them themselves.
And of course they no more care about the unfortunate Gazans then Hamas do.
Was Donald Trump advising Pakistan's military on election rigging strategies?
To ban a party, imprison their leader, disenfranchise its voters through dirty tricks and still have your favoured candidate come a very distant second is almost impressive.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Well, VVP has 20% of Ukraine after 10 years of trying so he can want what the fuck he wants but there are no means to get it.
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
I’m surprised Carlson didn’t get down and blow Putin .
And that’s the same for much of the GOP who are treasonous scum .
It's worth reminding ourselves - and the Americans - that this arsehole sprayed Novichok around Salisbury. Still surprised at how restrained the UK Gov was at the time.
British weapons have now killed thousand of Russian soldiers. We have had payback.
Putin feels the humiliation of day xxx of his 3 day war far more than the deaths. Of that, I am pretty sure.
After the story of the six year old girl in the taxi that led the BBC news and the brilliant report 'from our own cotrrespondent' you'd have to be pretty sick to continue supporting Netanyahu or Israel in any shape or form. Yesterday's pictures of the blown out ambulence with it's two paramedics dead inside just made it even more unbearable.
It was a major topic of conversation at an event I went to yesterday in Nice. It could turn into as iconic an image as the burning Vietnamese girl. It's difficult to knows how it's running across the rest of Europe.
Support for Israel on this is down to those who don't view Palestinians as proper 3d human beings.
That seems to be a UK thing. Perhaps it's the same thing as Brexit. This idea of British exceptionalism. The 'Zulu' mentality. Some of the posts on here are just alarming. Some of the brightest as wisest and most interesting people I've met are Arabs. They have a wisdom that goes back centuries. So many here just see them as the Indians in the cowboys and Indians that they grew up with
I can't claim similar exposure but yes I do detect a "them arabs are inferior to them Israelis" mindset underlying some of the commentary.
Understandably so.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
Many brilliant Jews is correct.
Hardly any of them Zionists
Being anti zionist is a protected characteristic thanks to the recent Bristol University case being antisemitic rightly is not.
I find pro Israel supporters are mostly unable to understand the difference which in itself is antisemitic
Being pro-Israeli is not the same as being pro-Zionist.
I find Israel haters are mostly unable to understand the difference which in itself is antisemitic.
Believing that Israel has a right to be recognized and treated as any other country and that it should have secure borders is different to thinking it has a right to any territory in which some bronze age biblical character once resided in.
Perhaps those who proclaim themselves as anti-zionists could explain what recognition, borders and security Israel should have.
I often criticise the UK defence industry, the MOD etc. But sometimes they do pull off minor miracles. Here's one: field-expedient improvised surface-to-air launchers, known as "FrankenSAMs". Product of the UK. Used in Ukraine.
Cheeses for sure but it's not just cheese. You can go to the biggest supermarket in France and they'll only sell melons for half the year. They have such a thing as 'out of season' which I don't remember in the UK for about 30 years
I quite like the idea of seasonal food. The looking forward to it. It somehow seems to taste nicer when you wait for it. It is odd that we enjoy looking forward to special food when it comes to Christmas, Easter, Halloween, Bonfire night, etc (some of which are seasonal and some aren't), yet we have to have everything else all year around. From my fruit crop I enjoy making summer pudding in the summer, Tarte Tatin in the Autumn, first crop of Rhubarb in March, etc, although I do freeze a lot of it. There is also the joy of making marmalade in January and sloe gin in the Autumn even if you are not consuming them then. To me we have lost something by being able to get raspberries, for instance, all year around.
It's one of the reasons I get a veg box delivery. Tends to be quite seasonal - or at least a very strong nod towards it. And helps stop me picking up the same veg at the shops all the time.
I’m surprised Carlson didn’t get down and blow Putin .
And that’s the same for much of the GOP who are treasonous scum .
It's worth reminding ourselves - and the Americans - that this arsehole sprayed Novichok around Salisbury. Still surprised at how restrained the UK Gov was at the time.
British weapons have now killed thousand of Russian soldiers. We have had payback.
Putin feels the humiliation of day xxx of his 3 day war far more than the deaths. Of that, I am pretty sure.
The problem with Trump saying he’d encourage me to attack NATO is that it makes it harder for my trolls to argue I would never have attacked Ukraine if he was still POTUS.
His apology really quite something. That’s obviously the price of keeping the nomination: complete mea culpa mea maxima culpa, otherwise you’re out.
Interesting test of whether proper heartfelt (or at least superficially heartfelt) apologies have a better impact than halfhearted ones.
He has to be removed as candidate.
How? The nominations have closed.
Labour would probably rather Galloway win now wouldn’t they? Otherwise they’re lumbered with this bloke representing them, although I guess they could just not give him the whip
GE24 is happening this year so I expect if he wins he will lose the whip and be replaced with Paul Waugh
Sir Keir has staked a lot on having changed the Labour Party, so he will almost certainly give this guy the short shrift. That will alienate the Muslim vote though, which is already wobbling
On the other hand, Labour might not win anyway
Sir Keir has done an excellent job of suppressing the Corbyn faction and some of its more unappetising ideas. Unfortunately, as the green investment U-turn has revealed, he's also turned Labour into a policy vacuum and confirmed his own image as a careerist who has no interest in doing anything beyond getting elected. If that means his offer ends up consisting entirely of continuity Conservatism done less incompetently then so be it.
This will have consequences. I feel more comfortable in my predictions of a hung Parliament (and the associated conviction that the mid term polls are totally meaningless) than I have done in some time.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Well, VVP has 20% of Ukraine after 10 years of trying so he can want what the fuck he wants but there are no means to get it.
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
Rather like saying a woman can "stranglewank" as much as she likes about how it legally is her body, "blah, blah", but it doesn't change the reality of how a lot of men think they should be allowed to rape her nevertheless.
If you add together all the other tens of millions of snippets that are being shared, around the world, it will surely be the most watched - and probably most-discussed - political interview of all time
Lol.
Nobody has watched more than 15 minutes of it.
It was a disaster. Even you didn't sit through it.
I absolutely did. It’s fascinating - after the first hour of tedium. But very very few will do that. It’s more than 2 hours long
The stats are in, however, for those seeing SOME of it. Even on YouTube it’s in the top 5 political interviews ever, cumulatively, indeed arguably its number 2 after Narendra Modi talking to some actor
If you can find another POLITICAL interview that has that virality, knock yourself out and (seriously) well done, I can’t. And I’ve searched
And this is just YouTube: the main platform is X
I mean. You could argue that ‘well they have to watch all 2 hours 14 minutes of it before it has any impact’ but then that would be silly. And you’re not a silly man
But what is a 'view'?
Is it an individual watching the whole interview from start to finish? Or is it a Russian bot adding a value onto the counter to claim a view?
Or is it both?
There are probably only ten people in the whole world who have seen that interview from start to finish. Two of those are Tucker Carlson and Vladimir Putin. The other seven is the camera crew forced to film that pile of shite, and the final person is the CIA operative who drew short straw and had to write a report on the whole thing.
On the platform formerly known as Twitter, a "view" simply means it has appeared on a user's timeline or in search results or other places. It does not mean that the user has watched a single second of it. Also, it counts each time a tweet is shown to a user, so if a user sees the tweet five times without watching any of it, that is five views. There is no way of knowing how many people have actually watched any of the interview on Twitter.
I count as at least one "view" of this interview on Twitter. It could be said that I've watched the first 10 seconds of it since Twitter starts playing videos automatically, but I didn't turn the sound on so I have no idea what Carlson was saying.
However we do know what equals a view on Youtube - it is at least 30 seconds of engagement with the actual video
Tucker Putin has racked up at least thirty million views on YouTube, cumulatively
There may well be a reason why the engagement would be a lot less than that on TwiX but it seems clear Carlson has got many tens of million of people (possibly over a hundred millon) to see at least SOME of his interview with Putler
Tell you what, why don't we cut a deal?
We all agree that Carlson-Putin was the most important political interview in the universe ever and had more views than the number of people on the planet.
In return, you agree never to mention it again.
It is the most boring topic since @Leons last monomania.
A bloodthirsty lying dictator being interviewed by a far right conspiracy theorist does not an interesting interview make. It's just clickbait for the gullible. No wonder he is so obsessed.
Yes, of course, that's why no one is talking about it. It's basically just me. And every single news outlet on the planet. And Boris Johnson. And Justin Trudeau. And the white House Press Secretary. And Zelensky. And and and
As a matter of interest, did you learn anything from the interview? If so, what?
Yes, lots of stuff
But, if I talk about it, I'll be accused of talking about it, to prove that people are talking about it, by the PB geniuses, so what can I do?
In other words, nothing.
OK, it seems you really want to know, so here is what I took away
1. Putin is properly smart
2. He is highly informed: he knows America's GDP growth, he knows the GDP by PPP of the top seven countries, he knows trade patterns
3. HE is not dying, he doesn't even look ill
4. He is an autodidact, and particularly obsessed with Russian history, and he has a vast but very boring knowledge of it, which he is unable to express excitingly
4. He GENUINELY believes Ukraine does not have a right to exist, and he's thought about it a lot - eg I didn;t know the etymology of Ukraine comes from "borderland" - but he's right, it does, and it's part of his argument
5. He does his research: he knew Carlson had applied for the CIA - a moment which threw Carlson
6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that
7. He fears and loathes America, fears its strength, loathes its hypocrisy - as he sees it
8. He is coldly irreligious
9. He seems to be a personal friend of Elon Musk - calls him "Elon" - but I could be wrong
10. He is quite up to speed on AI, and a bit scared of it
11. He is an absolute old fashioned Russian nationalist, in the Solzhenitsyn sense, he genuinely believes the stuff about the Russian soul, deep and Dostoevskyan (he actually cites Dostoevsky at one point)
12. He doesn't want an all out war, but mainly cause he would lose, or we'd all be dead, he's probably go for it if he could win
13. He is SCARED of China, they are not friends or allies, he pretends they are, but the body language says Fear, to me
There is more, lots more, but that's what I saw, for starters
Putin's Musk love is interesting. It certainly isn't friendship, but Putin seems to think Musk to be potentially the most useful American to Russia and worth cultivating.
The other main takeaway is that Putin has no intention of stopping or slowing his war against Ukraine but we should know that anyway, and it's not particularly on message for Carlson's agenda.
And also that Putin likely has no wider ambitions in contrast to what we are told by our media.
I wouldn't deduce from Putin not discussing his wider ambitions outwith Ukraine that he doesn't actually have them.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Well, VVP has 20% of Ukraine after 10 years of trying so he can want what the fuck he wants but there are no means to get it.
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
As it happens I'm not a big buyer of the notion that Ukraine is step one in Putin's plan to roll over Eastern Europe and remake the USSR. My view (for which I have no need of the Carlson interview) is that Ukraine in and of itself is an overreach and the plan, such as it is now, extends to achieving a partition and buffer zone.
I've very little clue about what goes on in the heads of most Russians. For me it's more about the contents of Putin's bonce. And he obviously does see Ukraine as "special". Is spending all this money, killing and maiming so many people, destroying vast swathes of territory, worth it to make the biggest country on earth a tiny bit bigger? Can't see it myself. Funny sort of "victory" that is, even if he manages it.
But it's about him, not me. About how he sees Ukraine. And he's convinced himself he's "bringing it home". Plus, another key point in his calculus, he's not out there fighting. He's just sat in Moscow giving the orders, getting vicarious thrills. No different to our own keyboard warriors in this regard.
I’m surprised Carlson didn’t get down and blow Putin .
And that’s the same for much of the GOP who are treasonous scum .
It's worth reminding ourselves - and the Americans - that this arsehole sprayed Novichok around Salisbury. Still surprised at how restrained the UK Gov was at the time.
British weapons have now killed thousand of Russian soldiers. We have had payback.
Putin feels the humiliation of day xxx of his 3 day war far more than the deaths. Of that, I am pretty sure.
Yes I wasn't implying Putin cares about the deaths, but you can be sure that each time a British missile strikes in Crimea he gets the right hump about it.
There was one key bit in there tbf. Is Putin only after Ukraine or would that be just the start?
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Well, VVP has 20% of Ukraine after 10 years of trying so he can want what the fuck he wants but there are no means to get it.
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
Rather like saying a woman can "stranglewank" as much as she likes about how it legally is her body, "blah, blah", but it doesn't change the reality of how a lot of men think they should be allowed to rape her nevertheless.
It seems a funny way of looking at the world.
It’s sadly pragmatic
Russia is a very powerful country (enough of this economy of Spain bullshit). It has vast natural resources and a deep self belief. It comprises 130m people and many of them - especially the elite - really do see Ukraine as naturally part of Russia, in the same way we see the Lakes as part of England, its actually a key part of their self identity
And they have nuclear weapons, and they are prepared to fight for it
Cheeses for sure but it's not just cheese. You can go to the biggest supermarket in France and they'll only sell melons for half the year. They have such a thing as 'out of season' which I don't remember in the UK for about 30 years
I quite like the idea of seasonal food. The looking forward to it. It somehow seems to taste nicer when you wait for it. It is odd that we enjoy looking forward to special food when it comes to Christmas, Easter, Halloween, Bonfire night, etc (some of which are seasonal and some aren't), yet we have to have everything else all year around. From my fruit crop I enjoy making summer pudding in the summer, Tarte Tatin in the Autumn, first crop of Rhubarb in March, etc, although I do freeze a lot of it. There is also the joy of making marmalade in January and sloe gin in the Autumn even if you are not consuming them then. To me we have lost something by being able to get raspberries, for instance, all year around.
Absolutely. For many years (ever since the year after we moved into our place in Lincolnshire), we have always stuck strictly to the principle of buying local UK produce except where it does not grow here normally (so we buy imported bananas, oranges etc but never strawberries, tomatoes and other soft fruits or veg). We adjust our diet accordingly throughout the year and eat seasonally, enjoying the arrival of new produce as it comes into season. It is helped by the fact we are now self sufficient in stuff like beans, potatoes and onions and of course we freeze fruit and veg where possible.
But I have not bought an imported tomato, strawbery or bean in more than a decade.
I absolutely agree with you about the festivals as well. They have so much more meaning when seasonal food is integral to them.
Comments
I may be delusional, but that is what I saw. The interview is two hours long, and intense. And goes deep into all these subjects, any interviewee (unless they are a brilliant actor, or stupid, or deeply autistic, and none of these apply, I do not think) will reveal quite a lot in those circs
Of course you could watch it and decide for yourself. But you prefer to watch the BBC and have them package it neatly for you, so you know what to think and believe
It might depend on how much mileage this might have . If the right wing papers really go for it . His comments were bad but not sure they’d class as anti-Semitic .
I think you might be surprised just how many people think something dodgy went on re the IDF initial response .
They can drop him for the general election because Galloway is a cancer and needs to be stopped before he can mestatise.
Israel beats the Arabs in every war.
Israel is a reasonably successful, developed and democratic country whereas Arab countries tend not to be.
While, on a wider level, Jews have produced countless brilliant scientists, artists, writers, musicians, bankers, businessmen, politicians etc whereas Arabs haven't.
Its this 'overachievement' by Jews which drives most of the dislike and fear of them in the western world in addition to some respect and admiration.
An MP who was suspended from the SNP during the election campaign for using anti-Semitic language on social media is to be readmitted to the party.
Neale Hanvey was elected MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath despite being suspended from the SNP on polling day.
He had apologised "unreservedly" for making posts on social media which he said were "clearly unacceptable".
Mr Hanvey will rejoin the SNP group in May on the condition he completes an education course at a Holocaust centre.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-51723096
There's a whole genre of "Putin is thick" memes on PB, and on all social media. Darth Putin etc
People want to believe he is dumb, he isn't. He clearly made a monumental fuck up in the original invasion, but he is not thick
https://x.com/dpjhodges/status/1756602317195866143?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
You asked me what I got from the interview, then accused me of getting nothing when I quietly demurred, so I gave you thirteen bullet points. And I normally charge
But also, it is undeniable that some on the other side (and not just Hamas) would love to do the same to Israel. As we saw on October 7th.
I'm just questioning whether the law will achieve what is intended, in the most cost effective way.
A few deterrent sentences - 12 years in chokey - and the problem will miraculously vanish
This crops up a lot on the internet. I don't think we've really got to grips with it yet in terms of numbers.
A massive expansion of council dog warden services? Extra police officers? Armed dog wardens? Drones to hunt them out in people's back gardens? Prison for their owners if they didn't comply?
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
Yes. You even get people explicitly saying that Israel should know how to behave, since they are a First World Country, with democracy and Eurovision. As opposed to the neighbours.
On the other hand, Labour might not win anyway
The other main takeaway is that Putin has no intention of stopping or slowing his war against Ukraine but we should know that anyway, and it's not particularly on message for Carlson's agenda.
Yes, it is a bit mad. And very expensive. But it doesn’t depend on dead people. And it would actually fix the problem for a reasonable value of permanent.
Unfortunately, that just means we get disappointed more often.
Leon has deduced from the interview, by careful observation of his words and body language, that it's just Ukraine. He will go no further. Not fussed.
This has huge ramifications.
Indeed that is surely what happened in Ukraine. He is so obsessed with Ukraine being this non-country, and basically and emotionally an integral part of Russia, he convinced himself the country would fold immediately, and welcome the embrace of Moscow
Vlad, you fucked up
As you suggest, it may be that the effect of his remarks are not proving as catastrophic as some would like.
People who seem to be 'different' are often resented.
People who seem 'different' who are more successful are very often resented.
Are you really in favour?
I guess that will have to do
BTW if you want to watch one bit of it, that is truly interesting, then I'd go for the China stuff
At one point he says "What choice do we have, we have a X000 km border with them, we have to live with them, we have co-existed for centuries" - and he looks resigned and uneasy as he says it
And when he talks of China's economic rise it is with a certain relish that they are overtaking the West, but also a certain fear that they are utterly eclipsing Russia. It is very telling. It is not the brotherly love he likes to portray with Xi
It’s inevitable anyway, but this will speed it up. When it was just a faction of the Labour Party it could be contained, but without that moderating force all sorts could be on the cards
https://news.sky.com/story/mums-on-magic-mushrooms-why-parents-are-microdosing-class-a-drug-13067275
We have come a long way in 60 years. Then it was valium.
"Kids are different today," I hear ev'ry mother say
Mother needs something today to calm her down
And though she's not really ill
There's a little yellow pill
She goes running for the shelter of a mother's little helper
And it helps her on her way
Gets her through her busy day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-zxBNz3XbM
"6. I get the sense his territorial ambitions do not extend beyond Ukraine, but, he is a lying tyrant, so don't hold me to that"
Tiresome
We do not expect Hamas or Hezbollah to adhere to conventions (no matter how much we might wish they would) because that is not the nature of those groups. We are also unsurpised when Syria or Iraq struggle to adhere to the accepted behaviour of states given how slightly they even cling to notions of statehood and how fractured they are (again not least because of the actions of the West post WW1).
But we do expect the relatively stable countirs like Jordan and Egypt to adhere to the conventions as we perceve them as, to a greater or lesser extent, stable. We would be far more surprised and disapointed if Jordan were to behave as Israel does than if Syria were to do so. Both neighbouring Arab counties but with very different recent histories.
I don't consider this to be 'racism of low expectations'. Just an acceptance that the recent history and nature of these countries (by which I mean their artificially fragmented nature) makes it more likely they will fail in our expectations.
Mind you, before the invasion, a number of Ukrainians in high positions were approached by Russian intelligence. Nearly all reported the approaches to the Ukrainian government which then played a double game.
This was a big contributor to the failure of the initial Russian assault.
But the apparent success of the approaches might have given the Russians the idea they were pushing at an open door.
It's wrecked his military, turned his soft allies in Europe away from him, screwed his reputation and created a wasteland on his western border.
That means his trade from now on will have to be to the East. To China.
China will not be supplicants as Germany were. China offers no easy territorial gains. China cares about itself, not about the balance of the wider world.
That means it is not at all a comfortable place for him to be.
And BTW, I've said on here many times that launching the Ukraine war wasn't stupid; it was a gamble, and one that nearly paid off. Hopefully he lays awake at night wondering "what if..."
As for Putin and China: he'll know well that the last significant conflict between their countries occurred in 1969, and knows that Xi is an expansionist leader.
I wonder sometimes if the actions of the IDF and the Israeli government are partly motivated by a sense of guilt for not having heeded the warnings alleged (at least) to have been available.
Anyway, where are the poor hostages? They seem to have been largely forgotten. Except, of course, by their friends and relatives.
Plus more dissonance about the MAGA types being traitors.
He's a consummate survivor, a cunning manipulator, an arch-plotter and a ruthless eliminator of rivals.
What he doesn't have is the same power base as Stalin. In the 1940s the Soviet army was well equipped with modern weaponry, partly their own and partly from Lend Lease, and very large. It also had had an excuse to project its power across Eastern Europe. Finally, in the days before the internet Stalin was clever at hiding his crimes, while in Ukraine they're happening in plain site.
But - equally - Putin either has, or is about to, go past Stalin as the Russian Empire's longest serving leader since Alexander II in 1881, although Mikhail Romanov's 32 years looks a stretch.
Hardly any of them Zionists
Being anti zionist is a protected characteristic thanks to the recent Bristol University case being antisemitic rightly is not.
I find pro Israel supporters are mostly unable to understand the difference which in itself is antisemitic
Our man in the Phnom Penh Premier Inn does extract a good point from Carlson/Putin that is worth restating. For VVP and almost all Russians, Ukraine (minus the Zakarpattia, Lviv and Chernivitsi oblasts) is part of the Russkiy Mir. It isn't just another country they have invaded for lols.
Now, the ultras can stranglewank on about how it legally is another country, blah, blah but that doesn't change the reality of how the Russians feel about it.
*to clarify - so far as I know Biden has never yet done this.
(Community Note: Putin worked as a KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years, rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel)
All over the shop.
It is now a couple of years since that monumental fuck-up at the start of the Ukraine invasion (and more than a decade since the proxy war in Ukraine got bogged down) and Putin is still in post. That is a major, ongoing success for him.
We are only looking at this from a Western perspective, and rarely think about the position in the Kremlin.
To the western world Arabs are little more than a source of continual geopolitical crisis.
Something which leads to oil price rises, terrorist attacks and refugees.
If the Arab world ever got its act together and sorted out its problems then few in the western world would think about them beyond considering them as a possible holiday destination.
The Arab world is the equivalent of an extended family living along a nearby street. Some seem okay but there's always problems at one house or another. Israel is a house on the same street but with a different family.
Not a matter of opinion.
It’s acting on it that is stupid and immoral.
Nothing particularly new, but well worth a précis.
To ban a party, imprison their leader, disenfranchise its voters through dirty tricks and still have your favoured candidate come a very distant second is almost impressive.
Pakistan election: Final results give Khan-backed candidates lead
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68266845
He’s cunning and ruthless
1) A desire to seize Gaza, preferably minus its population, so they can incorporate it and the West Bank into Israel in fulfilment of the 'facts on the ground' strategy;
2) An urgent need to avoid stopping the war short of that as if they do, all of them will be in serious trouble for the fuckup at the start and several of them might well end up in prison (if not for this, then for the many other crimes they have committed).
The hostages are probably considered expendable to that end. Heck, the Israelis managed to shoot three of them themselves.
And of course they no more care about the unfortunate Gazans then Hamas do.
I find Israel haters are mostly unable to understand the difference which in itself is antisemitic.
Believing that Israel has a right to be recognized and treated as any other country and that it should have secure borders is different to thinking it has a right to any territory in which some bronze age biblical character once resided in.
Perhaps those who proclaim themselves as anti-zionists could explain what recognition, borders and security Israel should have.
"Ukraine's ASRAAM Franken-SAM", The Armourer's Bench, YouTube, 4mins, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFPFFuAwt-U
So they’re the victims in this one.
https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1756639614574444977
This will have consequences. I feel more comfortable in my predictions of a hung Parliament (and the associated conviction that the mid term polls are totally meaningless) than I have done in some time.
It seems a funny way of looking at the world.
I've very little clue about what goes on in the heads of most Russians. For me it's more about the contents of Putin's bonce. And he obviously does see Ukraine as "special". Is spending all this money, killing and maiming so many people, destroying vast swathes of territory, worth it to make the biggest country on earth a tiny bit bigger? Can't see it myself. Funny sort of "victory" that is, even if he manages it.
But it's about him, not me. About how he sees Ukraine. And he's convinced himself he's "bringing it home". Plus, another key point in his calculus, he's not out there fighting. He's just sat in Moscow giving the orders, getting vicarious thrills. No different to our own keyboard warriors in this regard.
Russia is a very powerful country (enough of this economy of Spain bullshit). It has vast natural resources and a deep self belief. It comprises 130m people and many of them - especially the elite - really do see Ukraine as naturally part of Russia, in the same way we see the Lakes as part of England, its actually a key part of their self identity
And they have nuclear weapons, and they are prepared to fight for it
But I have not bought an imported tomato, strawbery or bean in more than a decade.
I absolutely agree with you about the festivals as well. They have so much more meaning when seasonal food is integral to them.