More lame Russia bashing

[pastronef]

Re:

Russia Hid 312 Positive Drug Tests.....at least!!

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11677024

so why is there "lame bashing" in the thread title, as if there was no reason for bashing them?

I know there are other dirty countries that have still to be bashed

but the Russian seem to deserve that, no?

 

[adamfo]

Re:

They said the FSB actually took part wow! Those who created this report better be careful for food getting poisoned, tips of an umbrella or any self inflicted gun shots to the head :lol:

There's a helpful diagram of what a FSB agent looks like here :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/36823453

 

[hrotha]

State-sponsored doping is not proven every day. That makes Russia special and it's fair to single them out.

 

[adamfo]

Re: Re:

Russia just simply hasn't moved on since the fall of communism, cheating is deeply ingrained and until there's a change of regime they'll just deny everything. It is fairly clear that Russia has been cheating at state level since the late 1960's, they weren't the only ones, all of the other Eastern European countries were at it too, The GDR were the absolute masters of cheating their way to Olympic medals. I'm sure Russia will kick and scream and remind us all they have nuclear weapons but a 12 month ban from all international sport should send out a message that cheating won't be tolerated. I'd say the same if any other country had a state sponsored doping program.

Pete

Lol, you watch too much British state propaganda. Obviously, Russia operated a state-sponsored doping programme (it is well known fact), just like UK. So many british cheater: Farah, Radcliffe, Ennis, Wiggins, Frome, Murray, rowers, track cycling etc and the UK government definitely are involved (cover up ....) As for nukes, Russians/Soviets are reminded your country only once. When you guys invaded Egypt and began to kill people there. The Russians definitely wiser than americans. They don't nuke people just for lulz, just like the yankees did in japan.

In this country we don't have state run and state controlled media like Russia and The BBC while state funded is the most respected News Media outlet in The World. Of course, I'm well aware that foreigners are skeptical of Britains recent success but we are a country of 60 million people so you would expect a sport mad country to produce a few world class athletes. As far as your child like political comments they're frankly not worth commenting on.

Pete

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The membership of the BBC Trust is entirely selected by the Queen & UK government. Over 70% of UK’s papers owned by three companies, over 80% of national audience share goes to Murdoch or BBC.

You sounds like average english dude.

Your government makes sure you get the worst education. It is easier to brainwash people.

The BBC Trust doesn't run the BBC nor is it directly State funded. The TV license fee and £1 .1 billion annual program sales from BBC Worldwide Ltd. pay for it. The BBC management runs it day to day. I've worked as a freelancer for some 20 years with the occasional job there.
Something like RT (Russia Today) has a different remit. It's function is to show Russia in a positive way. It's English language program sales are tiny.

 

[adamfo]

Re: Re:

I bet if people were to analyse countries that held Olympics and how well the home athletes did at their home games compared to 'away' games the results would tell us something similar to what Russia has been caught doing.

Good. I am glad someone else posted something like this. Perhaps it's been posted by others before, but I know I've mentioned this a few times in clinic threads before, China, Canada, Great Britain and Russia all had record medal hauls at their home olympics. Coincidence(s)? I don't think so. People will probably say 'a lot of money, time and effort was invested, home energy, motivated athletes, home fans, familiar surroundings, language, etc, etc.' How come this isn't said with Russia? All we hear is 'state sponsored this, state sponsored that, KGB, FSB, Putin...' Say something about Great Britain and you'll be labeled a "Russia/Putin sympathizer, brainwashed St. Petersburg troll..." I don't think it's as black and white anymore as it probably seemed in the 60's, 70's and 80's. I don't think people will get so easily fooled, not with the resources available.

On Sky/Froome threads some have felt there is a bias against the Brits and that nationalities shouldn't be attacked in terms of doping and doping-related topics. So why does all of this go out the window with Russia? It's alright to be skeptical about Russian performances at their home Olympics but mention the Froome, Radcliffe, Farah, Wiggins and you are labeled as 'anti-British?' I am all for being pragmatic and neutral, but where is the neutrality when it comes 'joe foreigner,' particularly Russia? And if an athlete who happens to be from an Eastern European country fails a dope test, one of the first things we'll read is 'hey look, he/she is from Eastern Europe, no surprises there...' yet when a Brit or American fails a test....nothing. This sort of talk is borderline xenophobic, in my opinion. I liken it to terrorism and muslims. A terrorist attack happens and boom, we've already established he/she is a muslim or of muslim descent, before any actual evidence comes out. And if the evidence is to the contrary...crickets.

The 3 documentaries made by the German TV channel ARD contain confessions from Russian athletes. I've watched all 3 and it's clear there has been little substantive progress made between the 2012 Olympics and the later Winter Olympics.The same PED methodology and people are involved although some have since died in mysterious circumstances.

 

[Robert5091]

Read McLaren's report at -
https://www.scribd.com/document/318560660/McLaren-WADA-Report-of-Sochi-Olympics

President Vladimir Putin said he would suspend officials named in the McLaren report, and the Tass news agency reported deputy sports minister Yuri Nagornykh was the first to go.

He knew of "every positive analytical finding" and decided which athletes to protect, according to McLaren's report.

Putin said whistleblower Grigory Rodchenkov, the former head of Russia's national anti-doping laboratory whose allegations prompted the investigation, was "a person with a scandalous reputation".

The Kremlin asked Wada to provide "more complete, objective, evidence-based information" to Russian investigators.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/36829318

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

I bet if people were to analyse countries that held Olympics and how well the home athletes did at their home games compared to 'away' games the results would tell us something similar to what Russia has been caught doing.

Not exactly a clear stat as most countries (GB did at least), will prepare years in advance development programmes/ academies to ensure their athletes do perform at the home games. GB have been improving medal wise every Olympics since 2000/2004, I expect it to drop this year. Never mind the fact in most sports, you usually find the athletes/teams perform better at home, hence the saying home advantage

Of course they prepare. That preparation costs money. Results are expected. Dope is part of the "preparation" and helps insure results. Not exactly a news flash here...

Because every single athlete that dopes or allegedly dopes wins?

Is that hat I said? Anything remotely like it? Let's try and stay within shouting distance of basic logic constructs, shall we?

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

I bet if people were to analyse countries that held Olympics and how well the home athletes did at their home games compared to 'away' games the results would tell us something similar to what Russia has been caught doing.

Not exactly a clear stat as most countries (GB did at least), will prepare years in advance development programmes/ academies to ensure their athletes do perform at the home games. GB have been improving medal wise every Olympics since 2000/2004, I expect it to drop this year. Never mind the fact in most sports, you usually find the athletes/teams perform better at home, hence the saying home advantage

Of course they prepare. That preparation costs money. Results are expected. Dope is part of the "preparation" and helps insure results. Not exactly a news flash here...

Because every single athlete that dopes or allegedly dopes wins?

Is that hat I said? Anything remotely like it? Let's try and stay within shouting distance of basic logic constructs, shall we?

"Dope is part of the preparation and helps insure results." So yes, you have said doping insures results. So don't be too outraged

 

[buckle]

Re:

People aren't giving Russia that reason because Soviet state sponsored drug program was well known and the fact this report focuses on recent times not 30 years ago. When a Brit fails a test they are destroyed in the media, look at the reaction to sprinter Dwain Chambers & when Ferdinand missed a test. Footballers have been caught taking legal highs, which I presume aren't on the banned list and they're on all of the front pages

Ferdinand has a gig on the BBC as does Paula.

 

[Chaddy]

Re: Re:

People aren't giving Russia that reason because Soviet state sponsored drug program was well known and the fact this report focuses on recent times not 30 years ago. When a Brit fails a test they are destroyed in the media, look at the reaction to sprinter Dwain Chambers & when Ferdinand missed a test. Footballers have been caught taking legal highs, which I presume aren't on the banned list and they're on all of the front pages

Ferdinand has a gig on the BBC as does Paula.

Neither have failed a drugs test.

 

[BullsFan22]

I think it's important to note propaganda from tv/national networks from any country. From the US perspective, I know that FOX, CNN, MSNBC and other mainstream media have strong ties to both political parties, particularly FOX with the Republicans and CNN rarely questions anything that the current administration does. I can't speak too much about BBC, just because I've never been to the UK, but I do read their news, watch videos and try to catch up on whatever I think is worth catching up on, on their youtube channel (BBC world, BBC news, BBC America...). Russia has been portrayed as 'evil,' by all these institutions. Sure, some of the negative press might be warranted, but consistent, agenda-based bashing is obvious. I think Putin has really hit a lot of nerves in the west. It wasn't all that bad around Vancouver, but I think it may have started in earnest when Russia won the rights to host the 2018 World Cup, then the LGBT rights issue in 2012/2013 which were talked about endlessly by the US media during the 2013 World Track and Field Championships in Moscow, then the Maidan November 2013, Ukraine Crisis, Sochi Olympics, Airplane incident, doping scandals, 2015 Track World's, more doping scandals...The US media was salivating and thriving. They needed something to talk about and Russia, the historical adversary that it is to the US, was a perfect topic. From what I can see/hear, the BBC isn't doing anything different.

 

[sniper]

Re:

State-sponsored doping is not proven every day.

State-sponsored doping is not investigated every day.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

I bet if people were to analyse countries that held Olympics and how well the home athletes did at their home games compared to 'away' games the results would tell us something similar to what Russia has been caught doing.

Good. I am glad someone else posted something like this. Perhaps it's been posted by others before, but I know I've mentioned this a few times in clinic threads before, China, Canada, Great Britain and Russia all had record medal hauls at their home olympics. Coincidence(s)? I don't think so. People will probably say 'a lot of money, time and effort was invested, home energy, motivated athletes, home fans, familiar surroundings, language, etc, etc.' How come this isn't said with Russia? All we hear is 'state sponsored this, state sponsored that, KGB, FSB, Putin...' Say something about Great Britain and you'll be labeled a "Russia/Putin sympathizer, brainwashed St. Petersburg troll..." I don't think it's as black and white anymore as it probably seemed in the 60's, 70's and 80's. I don't think people will get so easily fooled, not with the resources available.

On Sky/Froome threads some have felt there is a bias against the Brits and that nationalities shouldn't be attacked in terms of doping and doping-related topics. So why does all of this go out the window with Russia? It's alright to be skeptical about Russian performances at their home Olympics but mention the Froome, Radcliffe, Farah, Wiggins and you are labeled as 'anti-British?' I am all for being pragmatic and neutral, but where is the neutrality when it comes 'joe foreigner,' particularly Russia? And if an athlete who happens to be from an Eastern European country fails a dope test, one of the first things we'll read is 'hey look, he/she is from Eastern Europe, no surprises there...' yet when a Brit or American fails a test....nothing. This sort of talk is borderline xenophobic, in my opinion. I liken it to terrorism and muslims. A terrorist attack happens and boom, we've already established he/she is a muslim or of muslim descent, before any actual evidence comes out. And if the evidence is to the contrary...crickets.

The 3 documentaries made by the German TV channel ARD contain confessions from Russian athletes. I've watched all 3 and it's clear there has been little substantive progress made between the 2012 Olympics and the later Winter Olympics.The same PED methodology and people are involved although some have since died in mysterious circumstances.

I can't speak of the ARD (state funded German media) documentaries as I haven't seen any of them. They had a chance to investigate the allegations of widespread use of PED's in the Bundesliga but chose not too, instead focusing on other countries (not just Russia). Seppelt wants people to share information/leaks on doping or doping related issues. When I shared a few news stories on the Puerto scandal, he didn't respond. When interviewed by a Russian journalist, he didn't answer questions directly and started making personal attacks.

What's scary is that WADA apparently just went along with whatever ARD gave them. A lot of what was said in the initial reports was in yesterday's reports. Technically speaking, other 'sources' are doing the work WADA should be doing. Where is the 'independent' commission/report? WADA shouldn't be the ones making decisions if they aren't the ones doing anything. Good that they have a lawyer in the house in McLaren, who can be there for 'legal' purposes.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

State-sponsored doping is not proven every day. That makes Russia special and it's fair to single them out.

Should be commended really. Government taking responsibility to protect its citizens and athletes, by providing them with expert supervision for their doping. Better than most Western countries putting the onus on their athletes to source some dodgy EPO or store their own transfusions, increasing the risk involved - all so that they can just score a few political points.

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

People aren't giving Russia that reason because Soviet state sponsored drug program was well known and the fact this report focuses on recent times not 30 years ago. When a Brit fails a test they are destroyed in the media, look at the reaction to sprinter Dwain Chambers & when Ferdinand missed a test. Footballers have been caught taking legal highs, which I presume aren't on the banned list and they're on all of the front pages

Ferdinand has a gig on the BBC as does Paula.

Neither have failed a drugs test.

You come to the clinic with that defence?

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

DFA123, that's absolutely ridiculous.

State-sponsored doping is not proven every day.

State-sponsored doping is not investigated every day.

Not even in Russia. You need leads. Whistleblowers. Again, you can't just conjure them up.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

DFA123, that's absolutely ridiculous.

It wasn't entirely serious.

Not even in Russia. You need leads. Whistleblowers. Again, you can't just conjure them up.

This is the most remarkable thing from the whole episode for me. That Russia, of all countries, couldn't control and keep quiet the people who knew about the doping. You would have thought money (or bullets ) would have changed hands long before this became public.

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

People aren't giving Russia that reason because Soviet state sponsored drug program was well known and the fact this report focuses on recent times not 30 years ago. When a Brit fails a test they are destroyed in the media, look at the reaction to sprinter Dwain Chambers & when Ferdinand missed a test. Footballers have been caught taking legal highs, which I presume aren't on the banned list and they're on all of the front pages

Ferdinand has a gig on the BBC as does Paula.

Neither have failed a drugs test.

Exactly, they missed my point saying Ferdinand was lambasted by the press at the time when he was suspended for missing a test.

 

[sheisdisaster]

Re: Re:

Russia just simply hasn't moved on since the fall of communism, cheating is deeply ingrained and until there's a change of regime they'll just deny everything. It is fairly clear that Russia has been cheating at state level since the late 1960's, they weren't the only ones, all of the other Eastern European countries were at it too, The GDR were the absolute masters of cheating their way to Olympic medals. I'm sure Russia will kick and scream and remind us all they have nuclear weapons but a 12 month ban from all international sport should send out a message that cheating won't be tolerated. I'd say the same if any other country had a state sponsored doping program.

Pete

Lol, you watch too much British state propaganda. Obviously, Russia operated a state-sponsored doping programme (it is well known fact), just like UK. So many british cheater: Farah, Radcliffe, Ennis, Wiggins, Frome, Murray, rowers, track cycling etc and the UK government definitely are involved (cover up ....) As for nukes, Russians/Soviets are reminded your country only once. When you guys invaded Egypt and began to kill people there. The Russians definitely wiser than americans. They don't nuke people just for lulz, just like the yankees did in japan.

In this country we don't have state run and state controlled media like Russia and The BBC while state funded is the most respected News Media outlet in The World. Of course, I'm well aware that foreigners are skeptical of Britains recent success but we are a country of 60 million people so you would expect a sport mad country to produce a few world class athletes. As far as your child like political comments they're frankly not worth commenting on.

Pete

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The membership of the BBC Trust is entirely selected by the Queen & UK government. Over 70% of UK’s papers owned by three companies, over 80% of national audience share goes to Murdoch or BBC.

You sounds like average english dude.

Your government makes sure you get the worst education. It is easier to brainwash people.

The BBC Trust doesn't run the BBC nor is it directly State funded. The TV license fee and £1 .1 billion annual program sales from BBC Worldwide Ltd. pay for it. The BBC management runs it day to day. I've worked as a freelancer for some 20 years with the occasional job there.
Something like RT (Russia Today) has a different remit. It's function is to show Russia in a positive way. It's English language program sales are tiny.

:lol: BBC is just a mouthpiece of Tory government. The BBC Trust is responsible for approving the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. The BBC trust are also silenced Jeremy Bowen during the Gaza conflict, one of the few good BBC reporter. Not to mention, how many pedo scandals covered up and shrouded in silence for decades?

And the smear campaign against Corbyn (UK main oppositon leader)
Jeremy Corbyn ‘Systematically’ Attacked By British Press The Moment He Became Leader - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/26/jeremy-corbyn-media-coverage_n_8653886.html
BBC admit intentionally damaging Corbyn leadership with contrived live resignation - http://evolvepolitics.com/bbc-admit-intentionally-damaging-corbyn-leadership-contrived-live-resignation/
Former BBC Trust Chairman Sir Michael Lyons Says Broadcaster Is Biased Against Jeremy Corbyn - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/bbc-white-paper-michael-lyons-tony-hall_uk_57348c57e4b0b11a329eab4e
Jeremy Corbyn Complains To BBC About Panorama Programme On His Meteoric Rise - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/09/11/jeremy-corbyn-panorama_n_8121760.html
etc..
BBC’s Anti-Corbyn Bias ‘Extraordinary’, Says Ex-Trust Chairman - http://wideshut.co.uk/bbc-anti-corbyn-bias-extraordinary-trust-kuenssberg/

Such things happen only in poor third world countries.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

People aren't giving Russia that reason because Soviet state sponsored drug program was well known and the fact this report focuses on recent times not 30 years ago. When a Brit fails a test they are destroyed in the media, look at the reaction to sprinter Dwain Chambers & when Ferdinand missed a test. Footballers have been caught taking legal highs, which I presume aren't on the banned list and they're on all of the front pages

Ferdinand has a gig on the BBC as does Paula.

Neither have failed a drugs test.

Exactly, they missed my point saying Ferdinand was lambasted by the press at the time when he was suspended for missing a test.

He was 'lambasted' by the people who not long after gave him a job. I'd love to be 'lambasted' by a billion dollar+ industry and then get paid by that same company in the near future.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

DFA123, that's absolutely ridiculous.

State-sponsored doping is not proven every day.

State-sponsored doping is not investigated every day.

Not even in Russia. You need leads. Whistleblowers. Again, you can't just conjure them up.

Reversely, you need to keep potential whistleblowers happy, which Russia didn't do.
Nobody says they've been smart about it.
Miserably failed to hide their tracks. No arguing there.

And for investigating state-sponsored, systematic Olympic doping in the US, late 70s through to the 80s, no whistleblowers are needed.
The people who organized and facilitated it are on the record admitting and openly talking about it. They wanted a second Leipzig with blood and steroid doping.

Still, no investigation. Not even close.

Let's not start about (West) Germany and their whole "part of the dark past" act.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re: Re:

DFA123, that's absolutely ridiculous.

State-sponsored doping is not proven every day.

State-sponsored doping is not investigated every day.

Not even in Russia. You need leads. Whistleblowers. Again, you can't just conjure them up.

Reversely, you need to keep potential whistleblowers happy, which Russia didn't do.
Nobody says they've been smart about it.
Miserably failed to hide their tracks. No arguing there.

And for investigating state-sponsored, systematic Olympic doping in the US, late 70s through to the 80s, no whistleblowers are needed.
The people who organized and facilitated it are on the record admitting and openly talking about it. They wanted a second Leipzig with blood and steroid doping.

Still, no investigation. Not even close.

I didn't know about that, but from what I have found, Wade Exum, the former anti-doping chief in the USOC, said that from 1988-2000, the US authorities, primarily the USOC and USATF dismissed/hid/threw away/swept under the rug/whatever you can conjure up, hundreds of positive drug tests, and, according to Exum, at least half of those positives went on to win medals at World's and Olympics during this time period. Now, USATF has a long history of good results. It's not like they popped out of nowhere during the said period, but this guy (just like Rodchekov, his Russian counterpart) has seen lots of things. Carl Lewis failed several doping tests during the sprint/summer months of 1988, including that year's US Olympic Trials, and was cleared to compete. I think we all know what transpired in Seoul. Ben Johnson failed a test and boom, he was DQ'd immediately and like a true political farce, the gold medal went to the Lewis. Essentially, Johnson was made a scapegoat. After all these years Lewis hasn't acknowledged that he failed doping tests. The closes thing he's ever done to doing that, was in 2003 he said 'so what if I failed tests?' Why is Johnson DQ'd for failing drug tests, and Lewis isn't? Why was Lewis allowed to compete in Seoul (and beyond) in the first place? Johnson acknowledged that he took steroids, but actually he wasn't busted for what he was taking to prepare for those 100 meter races that summer.

Why shouldn't we take Exum's words like we are taking Rodchenkov's words? I can't imagine their work being too dissimilar, unless all we want to focus on is 'but us doping isn't state sponsored, and isn't policed by the special forces...' One would think that hiding hundreds of positive tests from top athletes, medal winning athletes, money making athletes is at least somewhat systematic, isn't it?

 

[gazr99]

Re: Re:

[quote="
Lol, you watch too much British state propaganda. Obviously, Russia operated a state-sponsored doping programme (it is well known fact), just like UK. So many british cheater: Farah, Radcliffe, Ennis, Wiggins, Frome, Murray, rowers, track cycling etc and the UK government definitely are involved (cover up ....) As for nukes, Russians/Soviets are reminded your country only once. When you guys invaded Egypt and began to kill people there. The Russians definitely wiser than americans. They don't nuke people just for lulz, just like the yankees did in japan.

In this country we don't have state run and state controlled media like Russia and The BBC while state funded is the most respected News Media outlet in The World. Of course, I'm well aware that foreigners are skeptical of Britains recent success but we are a country of 60 million people so you would expect a sport mad country to produce a few world class athletes. As far as your child like political comments they're frankly not worth commenting on.

Pete

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The membership of the BBC Trust is entirely selected by the Queen & UK government. Over 70% of UK’s papers owned by three companies, over 80% of national audience share goes to Murdoch or BBC.

You sounds like average english dude.

Your government makes sure you get the worst education. It is easier to brainwash people.

The BBC Trust doesn't run the BBC nor is it directly State funded. The TV license fee and £1 .1 billion annual program sales from BBC Worldwide Ltd. pay for it. The BBC management runs it day to day. I've worked as a freelancer for some 20 years with the occasional job there.
Something like RT (Russia Today) has a different remit. It's function is to show Russia in a positive way. It's English language program sales are tiny.

:lol: BBC is just a mouthpiece of Tory government. The BBC Trust is responsible for approving the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines. The BBC trust are also silenced Jeremy Bowen during the Gaza conflict, one of the few good BBC reporter. Not to mention, how many pedo scandals covered up and shrouded in silence for decades?

And the smear campaign against Corbyn (UK main oppositon leader)
Jeremy Corbyn ‘Systematically’ Attacked By British Press The Moment He Became Leader - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/11/26/jeremy-corbyn-media-coverage_n_8653886.html
BBC admit intentionally damaging Corbyn leadership with contrived live resignation - http://evolvepolitics.com/bbc-admit-intentionally-damaging-corbyn-leadership-contrived-live-resignation/
Former BBC Trust Chairman Sir Michael Lyons Says Broadcaster Is Biased Against Jeremy Corbyn - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/bbc-white-paper-michael-lyons-tony-hall_uk_57348c57e4b0b11a329eab4e
Jeremy Corbyn Complains To BBC About Panorama Programme On His Meteoric Rise - http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/09/11/jeremy-corbyn-panorama_n_8121760.html
etc..
BBC’s Anti-Corbyn Bias ‘Extraordinary’, Says Ex-Trust Chairman - http://wideshut.co.uk/bbc-anti-corbyn-bias-extraordinary-trust-kuenssberg/

Such things happen only in poor third world countries.

Whilst trying to avoid getting all political on a cycling forum, Corbyn and his supporters believe most of the world are against him and it's all a conspiracy. People haven't liked his leadership and quit the shadow cabinet, so he called it a coup against him

I have seen enough programmes where people have criticised the government over welfare, budget, housing, etc to not agree with the statement that the BBC is the mouthpiece of the Tory government. The satirical quiz shows like Mock the Week and Have I Got News for You had a field day with the Cameron pig story :lol:

 

[adamfo]

Sheisdisaster's last rambling post is very similar to copy and paste jobs that I've seen Kremlin troll house bots use. These characters suddenly appear when Russia is mentioned, then disappear just as quickly. The Guardian (liberal left leaning paper) wrote an article about it last year after their comments section was inundated in threads about MH17 and Ukraine.
Note how nouns are not preceded by the definite article. This type of syntax is quite common in east European English.
She/he clearly doesn't understand what a Constitutional Monarchy is or how the remit of the BBC is to question the Government of the day, whoever that might be, by daily interviews and documentaries on Government policy.

In term of media the Mailonline gets the most hits, around 12 million daily. Of the broadsheets the Telegraph and Guardian sites get many views. None are Murdoch owned.
Television National news is available from C4 and ITV or on Freeview the likes of CNN International or indeed RT.
Cycling news, is of course British, run by Immediate Media Co Ltd. who also publish the BBC Top Gear magazine, the Radio Times and other BBC Magazines titles under licence from BBC Worldwide.

 

[sheisdisaster]

Re:

Sheisdisaster's last rambling post is very similar to copy and paste jobs that I've seen Kremlin troll house bots use. These characters suddenly appear when Russia is mentioned, then disappear just as quickly. The Guardian (liberal left leaning paper) wrote an article about it last year after their comments section was inundated in threads about MH17 and Ukraine.
Note how nouns are not preceded by the definite article. This type of syntax is quite common in east European English.
She/he clearly doesn't understand what a Constitutional Monarchy is or how the remit of the BBC is to question the Government of the day, whoever that might be, by daily interviews and documentaries on Government policy.

In term of media the Mailonline gets the most hits, around 12 million daily. Of the broadsheets the Telegraph and Guardian sites get many views. None are Murdoch owned.
Television National news is available from C4 and ITV or on Freeview the likes of CNN International or indeed RT.
Cycling news, is of course British, run by Immediate Media Co Ltd. who also publish the BBC Top Gear magazine, the Radio Times and other BBC Magazines titles under licence from BBC Worldwide.

LOL @ these people.

The funniest part of your post. There is a solid proof that paid UK government trolls are using psychology-based influence techniques on social media websites such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and forums - https://theintercept.com/2015/06/22/controversial-gchq-unit-domestic-law-enforcement-propaganda/
Maybe you are a JTRIG agent

Btw, I don't give a *** about Russia. My point is that UK's the same crap as Russia. Nationalism, racism, propaganda maybe worse in your country. I'm glad you guys voted to leave the EU. Let's hope you weirdos trigger article 50 very soon and our countries have fewer things in common.

You all say the same thing but the facts tell me a different story: Over 70% of UK’s papers owned by three companies, over 80% of national audience share goes to Murdoch or BBC. Smear campaign against the oppositon leader even on the state TV. And no, BBC do not really criticize your government. They were one of the biggest cheerleaders for the Iraq war. Millions have died in Iraq and counting.

There is no western country with a more racist MSM than the UK. You guys still have colonial hangover and ignorance in general.