"How To Purchase A Prime Minister" - Why Won't the New York Times / Washington Post Cover Any of These Junkets?

[Curs0r]

 

[tom brady]

Orgasms toh poyettu unnadu ga🤣🤣

[TrollBait]

this george soros conspiracy is one of the dumbest in this history of conspiracy theories.

 

[Anta Assamey]

[TrollBait]

this is pure migrant bashing nonsense in the name of fighting the left.

Koch brothers from the right probably have influenced govt policies towards more immigration than Soros ever did. fact.

[Curs0r]

9 minutes ago, TrollBait said:

this george soros conspiracy is one of the dumbest in this history of conspiracy theories.

 

 

1 minute ago, TrollBait said:

this is pure migrant bashing nonsense in the name of fighting the left.

Koch brothers from the right probably have influenced govt policies towards more immigration than Soros ever did. fact.

What you asserted here doesn't have to be wrong for the contents of the video to be right nor vice versa. Both could be right. 

These are not diagonally opposed positions.

However theres a grain of truth to observers who question why nearly all coverage by NYT / Wash Post concerning Indian geopolitics is almost 

always shade-throwing, in one form or the other. 

People want unbiased coverage of the events occurring around them. 

Points to think about: 

• What does $18 billion buy you, if you were a philanthropy such as the OSF?
• What other recorded causes does OSF spend that money on? 

The point I want to drive home is that OSF need not break a single law - in the host countries - to do what it does, and still be found to be deleterious in its actions, influence and consequence, by open democratic societies such as India. Laws on the books might not explicitly forbid such activities. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.html

[Catalpha]

46 minutes ago, Curs0r said:

 

Repost

[Catalpha]

I already covered this

[TrollBait]

2 minutes ago, Curs0r said:

 

What you asserted here doesn't have to be wrong for the contents of the video to be right nor vice versa. Both could be right. 

These are not diagonally opposed positions.

However theres a grain of truth to observers who question why nearly all coverage by NYT / Wash Post concerning Indian geopolitics is almost 

always shade-throwing, in one form or the other. 

People want unbiased coverage of the events occurring around them. 

Points to think about: 

• What does $18 billion buy you, if you were a philanthropy such as the OSF?
• What other recorded causes does OSF spend that money on? 

The point I want to drive home is that OSF need not break a single law - in the host countries - to do what it does, and still be found to be deleterious in its actions, influence and consequence, by open democratic societies such as India. Laws on the books might not explicitly forbid such activities. 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.html

So you are saying Open Society is a bad thing? pray tell why?

[TrollBait]

Just now, Catalpha said:

I already covered this

you are way ahead on this. 

[TrollBait]

11 minutes ago, Curs0r said:

People want unbiased coverage of the events occurring around them. 

 

people should stop reading NYT/Washington Post if they wanted unbiased coverage.

they are war mongering, US empire shilling rags.

people can have their own media these days, and a lot of them do have.

its better if everyone stops claiming they are unbiased. or that they wanted unbiased news.

media is biased, and the public searches for content they are comfy with and reads it. 

[Curs0r]

9 minutes ago, Catalpha said:

I already covered this

Feel free to quote your thread or post here. 

Surely it wouldn't hurt to engage varied opinions on this.

Especially when there is such scant unbiased information on such matters / topics. 

[TrollBait]

4 minutes ago, Curs0r said:

Feel free to quote your thread or post here. 

Surely it wouldn't hurt to engage varied opinions on this.

Especially when there is such scant unbiased information on such matters / topics. 

you are yourself shadowboxing on this topic, while claiming to want unbiased information.

I haven't watched the video you posted. but pls tell me why you are curious what happens in these OSF junkets.. what do you think happens in those junkets that deserve an urgency of coverage from anyone?

It looks like you are anti immigration nut, railing against open society. I may be wrong, but that's the impression I get.

[Curs0r]

Quote

It looks like you are anti immigration nut, railing against open society. I may be wrong, but that's the impression I get.

 

Not true.

Sovereign nations are free to do what they please.

Not even cherry picking here - Thailand just kicked out a bunch of Western expats, it is said to please China. Some have been living there for over a dozen years there.

Last I heard you arent even allowed to buy land there. 

Canada asked KSA students to leave which surprised many because of a spat between the countries.

You'd be surprised how much of this goes on, without so much as a raised eyebrow every day. 

On a side note, you seem to be the one with an axe to grind here; I said I was open to reading on the less-publicized side of OSF and what it primarily does with the money. I mean its no small sum of money. Some countries' GDPs dont amount to $18 billion 

 

 

 

[TrollBait]

6 minutes ago, Curs0r said:

 

Not true.

Sovereign nations are free to do what they please.

Not even cherry picking here - Thailand just kicked out a bunch of Western expats, it is said to please China. Some have been living there for over a dozen years there.

Last I heard you arent even allowed to buy land there. 

Canada asked KSA students to leave which surprised many because of a spat between the countries.

You'd be surprised how much of this goes on, without so much as a raised eyebrow every day. 

 

Sovereign nations are not free to do as they please. They have to answer to their constituencies. I get that people have not completely grown out of monarchy and think elected leaders are basically monarchs with full power to do as they please until they are replaced. But its not true.

And some of the constituencies inside these sovereign  nations want different policies and fight for it. If Soros is helping this group in their fight, he's doing so because he thinks its good for his bottom line. No different from any billionaire. I don't understand why people have built him up as this singular evil figure on the left, when he probably funded a few pro immigration groups in Europe once upon a time and nothing more.

I'm not surprised at all with Canada did. But which of its constituencies were not happy with the decision and why wasn't it challenged? the right wing people don't want to challenge something that the left does, but wants to use it to show hypocrisy, when its just the govt standing up to its own stated goals and ideals, Leftist leaning govt does what it wants, and leftist groups will protest for what they want.

I dont see what's the problem here. The issue with Saudi students is not an immigration issue, but a diplomatic one. and too bad no one fought the case of saudi students affected in it. But they were not immediately deported. Several of them stayed back almost an year into the spat.