The Panama Papers thread

[Xarog]

If i spoke incorrectly and an article does actually exist then post it please. I sincerely want to read it.

Before you ask that, why not look at the entirety of the Russian media's reports instead of focusing on RT exclusively.

You speak Russian, don't you?

I mean, why should RT stand for the entirety of Russian media when RT made comments about the whole English media and not a select publication?

 

[Cray]

What space launch vehicle is regularly killing its passengers?

Am guessing he was referring to the Space shuttle, which is a bit dishonest as only 2 of the 135 space shuttle missions ended in fatalities.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

What space launch vehicle is regularly killing its passengers?

That would be the one NASA retired, the shuttle or at least the ones named Challenger and Columbia respectively:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents#Astronaut_fatalities_during_spaceflight

I'm of course saying it tongue-in-cheek fashion, but the shuttle design has killed 3.5 times as many people as its Russian competition.

 

[Xarog]

That would be the one NASA retired, the shuttle or at least the ones named Challenger and Columbia respectively:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents#Astronaut_fatalities_during_spaceflight

I'm of course saying it tongue-in-cheek fashion, but the shuttle design has killed 3.5 times as many people as its Russian competition.

But how many missions did the shuttles fly relative to the Russians, though?

 

[ISP cash cow]

Cameron's dad, senior Tories’ offshore asset dealings exposed & UK media still focus on Putin

https://www.rt.com/uk/338300-cameron-putin-panama-papers/

People like Cameron also?

not really true. The Brit media this morning that I was watching mentioned about Putin in the Panama papers and then went onto the fact that Cameron's dad is also listed. They even went on to show the snippet from a year or so ago where David Cameron was going to be the leader in fighting UK tax evasion (and showing the hypocrisy in turn).

The UK media do not hold back in baseball batting the kneecaps of their own politicians if they can

 

[Xarog]

The UK media do not hold back in baseball batting the kneecaps of their own politicians if they can

Depends on the topic. But in this case I'd agree with you.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Am guessing he was referring to the Space shuttle, which is a bit dishonest as only 2 of the 135 space shuttle missions ended in fatalities.

Not dishonest, just using a bit of humour here, although 2 of 135 is a hell of a lot less reliable than 2 of over 1000 and counting

EDIT: sorry, forgot source: http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/2138/how-many-successful-soyuz-launches-have-there-been

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

But how many missions did the shuttles fly relative to the Russians, though?

I didn't know and had to go looking, but see post #74, turns out Soyuz designs have flown many more times, in the vicinity of ten times more flights than the shuttle. It is still in service of course so who knows where it will end.

 

[buka001]

That would be the one NASA retired, the shuttle or at least the ones named Challenger and Columbia respectively:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents#Astronaut_fatalities_during_spaceflight

I'm of course saying it tongue-in-cheek fashion, but the shuttle design has killed 3.5 times as many people as its Russian competition.

Ahh so you were disingenious.

As a side note, do yourself a favour and read up on what NASA did in response to the Columbia disaster with regards to planning future missions etc.

Really opens the mind about how people should take responsibility for ones errors.

 

[Xarog]

I didn't know and had to go looking, but see post #74, turns out Soyuz designs have flown many more times, in the vicinity of ten times more flights than the shuttle. It is still in service of course so who knows where it will end.

Ya sure, it's just that there's always the possibility for stats to be distorted.

And wow, people sure do take jokes seriously today @ buka001.

 

[Unhappy1]

Before you ask that, why not look at the entirety of the Russian media's reports instead of focusing on RT exclusively.

You speak Russian, don't you?

I mean, why should RT stand for the entirety of Russian media when RT made comments about the whole English media and not a select publication?

Purely because of RT's commentary, i've read other Russian publications take on the matter. I want to specifically see what RT has to say though, post it if you come across it please.

 

[Xarog]

Purely because of RT's commentary, i've read other Russian publications take on the matter. I want to specifically see what RT has to say though, post it if you come across it please.

So does the Russian media give a fair account of how Putin/Putin's friends are involved?

Cuz if so, what are we talking about? Is upset at RT's apparent tu quoque all that's going on here?

 

[McSack]

So does the Russian media give a fair account of how Putin/Putin's friends are involved?

Cuz if so, what are we talking about? Is upset at RT's apparent tu quoque all that's going on here?

For godsake just post the damn article already so we can all read it and move on with some meaningful discussion!

 

[Unhappy1]

For godsake just post the damn article already so we can all read it and move on with some meaningful discussion!

Thanks

 

[zippy]

I'm definitely watching Panorama on BBC tonight

 

[Xarog]

For godsake just post the damn article already so we can all read it and move on with some meaningful discussion!

I already did. Unhappy didn't like it.

He seems to think RT speaks for the entirety of Russia and its true observations are contemptable because of the source. Maybe you don't find that meaningful, but I think objecting to such standards is meaningful.

 

[Unhappy1]

I already did. Unhappy didn't like it.

He seems to think RT speaks for the entirety of Russia and its true observations are contemptable because of the source. Maybe you don't find that meaningful, but I think objecting to such standards is meaningful.

At this point i have to assume you're trolling.

 

[McSack]

I already did. Unhappy didn't like it.

He seems to think RT speaks for the entirety of Russia and its true observations are contemptable because of the source. Maybe you don't find that meaningful, but I think objecting to such standards is meaningful.

ummm no you didn't ...

Thats not discussing the issue, its just pointing fingers at western media and you know it. If anyone comes across an article from RT that genuinely discusses the issue, please post it.

Seriously Xarog. Where is the article discussing the issue ? I for one would really like to read another perspective on the matter if there is one

 

[OrbitalDawn]

For godsake just post the damn article already so we can all read it and move on with some meaningful discussion!

It doesn't exist, naturally. An RT article taking a critical look at Putin, I mean.

 

[Xarog]

At this point i have to assume you're trolling.

Why, because I ignored your whiny objection about its content? You cannot deny that RT is drawing people's attention to the issue LOUD and CLEAR. What more could you possibly expect of them, given the fact that all publications will have a certain amount of bias Mr openly declares his (anti-Russian) prejudice?

Do you think it is in any way conceivably realistic to state that RT is anyone's primary english source of news inside the UK?