a useful idiot - almost
harding is dire (the grauniad assessment was wrong only about rt, not the show)
but then so is the show
do yourselves a favor and dump it: save the money and get alyona proper cocktails: or hire a business reporter who knows what they're talking about; or buy more ADHD medicine for Max
the only thing so far brought to light is how bad an interviewer assange is and how vile and malicious horowitz is

The content was conceptualised. There was no real dialogue. Sissek was spouting over Horowitz. They were undercutting and overriding each other. Real listening was missing.I sure hope that when any opposing group sits down to dialogue with another, that there is at least a minimal amount of mutual respect and self awareness.If Horowitz had silenced his phone after the first intrusion, he would have shown some respect. He didn't. I would have wanted to hear Mr. Assange speak and come to the fore more. This time his voice was almost drowned out.

Absolutely superb Episode 2 interview RT - Full Marks - That is how genuine, honest and believable dialogue in call backs should be. Well done!

Art - er what on earth are you talking about? You appear to have missed my point entirely and made some rather bizarre yet strangely amusing sweeping statements - I can catergorically state I did not personally invade Iraq, Afghanistan (although I feel compelled to point out that Afghanistan was already pretty messed up before the invasion in 2002 - try looking up Afghan history 1979-88 see what went on then - it wasn't pretty) nor did I bomb Libya either. You clearly are a very highly educated, well read person and know far more than me on this - especially the bit about the condoms in Libya I mean obviously that is true and not a completely made up story. At all. I would also like to point out that just because I have criticsed some of the content of this website you seem to automatically assume I am an American. Clearly a show of your intellectual prowess and once again completely incorrect. As both of you are clearly not on the same intellectual wavelength as myself I shall leave you with a phrase my dear Granddad taught me '10 wise men cannot answer the utterances of a fool' (or fools in this case)I apologise for trying to have a rational discussion with you both I see you are both out of your depth.

Russian view on the world is the same as mine tbh. That does not mean that i am Russian or that i do not know that this news agency  is not Russian.
But i felt the western media and propaganda and influence and news objectivnes and non-bias reporting on my skin.
My country is one of those where USA and NATO 'helped the people' and still are.

Apologie s I was under the impression you had a basic understanding of what USA is, as opposed to swallowing the utter rubbish with which you are bombarded in your country.

I do not think that i spoke of things that are out of my sphere of understanding and i am just an average joe.

Wide variety of sources? Eh! Which ones? BBC/CNN? Other USA/UK media houses? Please! even BBC documentaries are biased as hell.
Much more than RT.

On the other thing i do agree on the need to not depend on only one source of news, but RT doesnt try to influence the thinking process of readers as much as the western media. This is a big plus in my book.
By this i dont mean that it doesnt try at all, it just doesnt push as much as western media, on scale from 1 to 10 i would say the west is around 10 and RT around 2 or 3.

I find psychology to be more useful when thinking about news/politics than anything else. Often asking myself questions after reading/after visiting sources of information: What thought did they want to push on me, and questioning my first conclusion after reading the article if it is something they want me to think or is it a decision i made not influenced by other. I find myself doing that a lot less while reading RT content then others.

Maybe my views of the world are to similar to the views of Russian tv station.
although i am an atheist i will quote this:
In heaven God, on earth Russia.

good luck RT and keep up!

Corrections in my last post: When US invaded Afghanistan for Osama Ben Laden, OBL had died two months later.

=> SMJ
When US invaded Afghanistan for Osama Ben Laden, OBL had been dead for two years already. An ancient land in ruins and hundreds of thousands are dead and causing untold death around the world for producing over 95% of the world's narcotics under US army protection now. Did you admit and apologize for your lies? When US invaded Iraq for WMD, Iraq did not have even simple bullets to shoot back after 12 years of genocidal sanctions that caused the death of a million children under 6 yo. Over two million innocent people are dead. An ancient land in ruins. Underground water contaminated with DU for the next 500 years and even now nine yo girls with uterus cancer pop up like mushrooms. Did you admit and apologize for your lies? When NATO got its permission to carpet bomb Libya because Gaddafi had distributed condoms in his army personnel to rape dissidents, the Judaized Khazar Bernard Henry Levi had already injected his international merc thugs into Libya from Egyptian and Tunisian borders and needed air support for marching towards the capital. After slaughtering over 50,000 people, now this land is in total disarray and so called Al Qaeda militants rule it. Britain spent half a million dollars to destroy the country and after “liberation” it got a $30b contract to rebuild what it destroyed. Did you admit and apologize for your lies? Why should we think you have changed when you talk about what has caused this “crisis” in Syria? Your repulsive charlatanism as a “trained historian” when you criticize “anti-Semitism” while the 18 million mongrel Hun convert “Jews” are Altaic and have not a single Semitic genes in them, and when you as an “amateur political analyst” sell the idea of the “need to consult a wide variety of sources” but at the same time order to shut down the views you do not like... is beyond belief. You show the same symptoms of the globalists who reserve the rights to set the criteria for others but fail to offer a sane rationale.

HEH - Apologies I was under the impression you had a basic grasp of the situation in Syria as opposed to swallowing the utter rubbish that is posted on this website. I must add though as a trained historian and amateur political analyst and military historian to fully understand any situation you need to consult a wide variety of sources from a wide variety of countries (and where possible differing political viewpoints within those countries) it is only then can you truly understand a situation and THEN form your own opinion. Just because RT reports on different stories and often offers differing viewpoints to the mainstream Western media does not mean everything they report or say is 100% true or accurate or even trust worthy- remember it advertises itself as a 'Russian view of the world' and of course Russia has a relationship with the Assad regime so of course their reporting will be biased - Just like the Western media was biased against Gaddafi.

The USA and NATO intervention over the years and even backing up of some people will lead to issues that will not be solved with out conflict.

The pressure on Sirya is not something thats happening because of their concerns for the citizens (worse things are happening in neighboring countries but they are pro-USA so we dont see any sanctions or pressure on them).
You are under the impression that what USA and NATO is doing is for the better of the people.  If it was it would have took a different road to get results. Under what circumstances do you think that backing up agression and violent terrorists in Sirya is justified as helping the people? Its obvious that its an attempt to occupy and later continue the campagning in the middle east in Iran, thus gaining control over the region.

There is not one country today where everyone is content with the situation, but that does not give foreign influences the right to meddle in the internal affairs of those coutries and should not have the right to do so in Sirya.

In the end no matter of the views people have only those in power move the world.

HEH - Both sides were culpable of breaking the ceasefire in Syria over the last few weeks, government troops did not pull out of towns as promised - the vast majority did but some remained and simply hid and yes anti-Government forces also goaded troops to get them to react. I do not think the Syrians want wars or fighting I think they want peace and freedom to express themselves - remember the whole crisis started because the Government imprisoned some school boys for writing anti-Assad graffitti! School boys!! A completely over-the-top reaction but not really suprising as the Assad regime is one of the most brutal in the Middle East that sadly is a fact which is why many in the West are supporting anti-Government protestors. Those protesting against the imprisonment of these children faced brutal repression and have done ever since. I believe the Syrians like many others should have the right to protest and criticise their government without being killed or tortured or violently repressed which is what this crisis is about. Of course everyone has the right to express themselves but more often than not the comments posted are vile racist or anti-Semitic and RT should not allow such comments to remain on the website as they simply perpetrate racism and intolerance. RT has a responsibility to provide balanced views and should not pander to trolls or racist and insulting nonsense. Sadly you read any comment posted under a story about black people in the USA and the comments will more often than not be blatant insulting racist nonsense. That in my opinion is unacceptable. Those sorts of views should have no place anywhere.