What Has the Putin Interview Achieved?

Vladimir Putin’s challenge was to tell Americans through Tucker Carlson a complicated and unfamiliar narrative of how dearly Ukrainians and Russians are paying for Putin’s initial naïve trust in the West, writes Tony Kevin.

It is clear by now that both Vladimir Putin and Tucker Carlson took risks in embarking on their interview last week, gambles that appear to be paying off so far.

[consortiumnews.com]

I'll first start with saying it was disheartening to see comments of people who wouldn't even touch the interview due to who the interviewer and the interviewee were. I was obviously more concerned about it being from a Russian network, although that shouldn't hold anyone back from the potential of expanding their knowledge either. I've attempted to pound the fact that even news sources we find questionable will deliver good information periodically. It's really a matter of timing in most cases to control the narrative at any given time when it's important for them to wage a campaign of deception.

But when it comes to an issue so relevant to what's happening currently, and to this nature, we should all make it a point to attempt to discover whether a moment as this one provided has something worthy to consider. So that we can discuss it intelligently with each other.

On occasion I have stated that I can observe both left and right biased news and pull out useful information from them. In which I can pretty much pull the pieces of good information from each and together using history, build a decent opinion, and discard all the junk they throw at each other. The junk is there to entertain their viewers and set a president of capture, while installing and cementing within their followers perception management. They essentially tell on each other! Same as the two sides of the political arena of representation. They essentially expose the unethical practices and crimes of each other for you! There's absolutely nothing more that they can do. So they divide the truths and then each side throws in junk to capture their audiences. All you have to do is filter out the bullshit!

And because so many avoid the other sides angles, they end up supporting the very same unethical practices and crimes of those they do support. IT'S INSANITY! Once you realize this, you end up seeking sources that void out much of the bullshit. They already have most of those facts, and more information to add to help clarify that which they are dividing amongst themselves to deceive their followers. Even their facts come with limits which is for self preservation.

Ok, on to the article. This is my reply at CN. You'll have to actually read the article to understand it. Obviously I didn't do commentary as I read it like I usually do.

I suppose you could argue naiveness on Putin’s part from one angle. But the ending results from the actions of the west overwhelmingly weigh in favor of Putin. In regards to the fact that those actions once again serve as cementing the repetitive untrustworthy atmosphere of the west. That decision of Putin probably also saved 10s of thousands of lives considering the actions that followed in Bucha of the fascist. Obviously, no one’s life has worth to these people other than servitude to their ideology and current agenda to satisfy the west. The free ride ends without it. The common practice in the newly regions of the Russian Federation is to kill and destroy as many and as much as possible as they retreat. I think it’s fair to say the same scenario would have played out in Kiev and surrounding areas also. Who’s to say this might not have been a goal of Putin’s?

Relative to a comment above. I take articles like this and add my own commentary to them in an online Agnostic community. Getting particular people to observe the interview has been difficult. The length is an obvious issue. Video being the other. The two aspects are a collision with cognitive dissonance that already exist in which republican supporters can be added to. I’ve found it hard to get people to view video news as it is, let alone long versions of videos of this length. The other underlining problem is Putin, Carlson, and RT. A vast majority of democratic supporters won’t touch it due to the interviewer, Putin, and the relationship with RT. So, whatever angle you attempt to deliver it from, it becomes difficult to build exposure of it.

That just made me think of another issue. While your news site is so relevant towards exposing information we find hard to find and get out to others, you also share news from other independent sites I follow. Yet never anything from RT. They have great talk shows and a great live news network that delivers a completely different realistic view of worldly political issues that we’ll never see in western medias. It would be nice to also see you independent news sites help us get the messages from those great journalists and vast number of scholars seen there from around the world giving their insights also. Are we not better as a united force that includes them also?