Comments by "justgivemethetruth" (@justgivemethetruth) on "UnHerd" channel.

  1. 60
  2. 35
  3. 33
  4. 14
  5. 12
  6. 12
  7. 9
  8. First thing I notice is this lady's young age, and probable inexperience, which points to a political appointment or someone that higher powers are manipulating - much like Zelensky. Dishonesty #1 - Maybe this lady wants to try to imagine what life was like for ethnic Russians in the Donbas getting shelled for 8 years solid by Ukrainian nationalist forces which to get elected that Zelensky pledged he would end. She is completely dodging the question about censorship. Like anyone who spoke for peace or against Zelensky would be shut down in the least or disappeared. What nonsense. The solid answer to national divisions of this kind - basically war - has been from the US/UN/NATO - to divide countries. Yet for some reason Ukraine on Russia's border does not invoke that solution. I think this lady is an opportunist, or perhaps cannot get out of the country and is being threatened or cannot find any other way to survive this situation. This lady seems to be hear to put a pretty Ivanka Trump looking voice to the conflict. As I see it, the answer is to partition Ukraine as the UN would have partitioned any other violented divided country in the world down the line where the demographics change between East//Russian and West/Ukrainian ... there really is no other way - because if Ukraine "wins" for example, there are still all those people in Eastern Ukraine that presumably the Ukrainian military will feel they have to run out of the country or kill. If Russia wins it is slightly easier - Ukraine will turn into a small landlocked rump state - but the war and violence will end.
    8
  9. 7
  10. 7
  11. 7
  12. 6
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 3
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26. 2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54. Varoufakis has sound logic and some good ideas, but I think the problem is - long term can either side of this, the Americans or the Russians be trusted to stay the course on any commitment they make. For example the commitment the West made not to expand NATO, and Russia's acceptance or losing influence and economic and industrial ties with Ukraine. I read that Ukraine was 1/3 of the Russian economy. I also read that since having these connections to the West, the EU, much of Ukraine's economy has been hollowed out, and shuttered, because the EU does not need Ukrainian heavy industry to compete with Western European corporations. And that in recent past years a million Ukrainians have left Ukraine because the economy is terrible, and there are no good jobs. Forget mansplaining, or Westsplaining, what if Ukrainians have been convinced to go against their better interest by lies from the West? These connections to the West are not going to pave the streets of Ukraine with gold, more likely it is to exploit resources, and in typical Western pattern the people of Ukraine will not benefit one bit from the exploitation of their country's resources. So, if the compromise position is one where both sides are unhappy to a similar degree, why would we ever think that they both will settle for that in the longterm and that one or the other will not either decide to unilaterally change the terms, or one or the other will not deliberately provoke the other side to military action so they can claim moral superiority?
    1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 23:00 - censoring a sitting governor talking to leading scientists. that is as misleading as it would be if you have those leading scientists talk to a totally ignorant and even malevolent idiot and then AI'ed the video to sychronize DeSantis into their place and replace the voice. It has negative value to society. plus, on these Twiter feeds it is not really censorship because some people still hear it, and they can broadcast it out to their networks. This is just Twitter decided not to over-amplify this or let it get out of hand until it meets certain criteria. Like - for example if De Santis actually learned something or had some un-cherry picked people weight in to show how incompetent he is - or isn't. If DeSantis, and by extention you malefactors on the extreme right actually ever had a point or engaged in a fair, honest, argument without media or rhetorical tricks it would be major news and it would have been amplfied to the world. Or could have been. In any case - to make this whole twitter files thing - a thing - there has to be something ... not just some amorphous suspicion, but a clear output or even output(s) of more questions of solutions. Or polls to people. The best thing, though kind of sad, is the best thing Elon Musk did was to end his CEO position by poll. That is an example of the kind of thing Twitter could be tuned to provide. But every organization is so courrupt and criminal that no one wants a real measurable veriable peer reviewed truth to come out - they don't want truth - they want to push the agenda of a warlike minority in the alternate universe of business, but which is still as destructive and toxic as war.
    1
  82. There is - what I could call a defect in social media - a lot of social media sites where someone - or a bunch of unspecified people acting in concert can flag someone and get them shut down or kicked off. I have posted contrarian about the Ukraine war trying to post alternative views and history that have never been reported on by the media - and I get a swarm of the same people replying, harassing me, and flagging my comments ... just one is a massive sea of trolling establishment-centric narratives that have gotten me 3 or 4 times suspended from posting for hours to days. I did not use profanity, or violate any sites terms of service. I am careful to be precise and cool about my comments - even though I might be angry at the time of posting, but it never helps anyone to read ones post if they are just name-calling or insults. I stick to the facts - always willing to hear if I am wrong or missed something. That is not what social media seems to care about. All social media sites seem to be about amplifying their own values and priorities - or in following the government's or military's releases. I am not really sure how to look at that. I can see on some things it might be valid and useful, but so far I have not seen it. Perhaps the thing i can most agree with is the establishment's take on Covid and masks and lockdowns - having seem the trolls attacking it - based on purely made up lies and false claims. I don't know if the answer to any of this is to allow anything and just leave it up to free speech, which we are already seeing on Twitter, it is hard to say if there is even such a thing as free speech.
    1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1