Aller au contenu

Déchet(s) recommandé(s)

il y a 9 minutes, Daleko a dit :

la façon dont tu les exprimes

J'suis vraiment pas du genre à pondre une brique devant l'évidence. Et de toute façon, personne ici ne me prend aux sérieux. Alors à quoi bon me faire chier là dessus.

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites

C'est vrai que nous sommes en fin de cycle, que l'on peut craindre une nouvelle crise économique (il y en a une tous les dix/quinze ans) qui risque d'être compliquée, les jeux sur les taux ne vont pas pouvoir durer éternellement, les tensions commerciales USA/Chine ont des conséquences néfastes, l'économie allemande ne va pas bien, le Royaume-Uni va se prendre une raclée économique grâce au Brexit, etc. Les effets de la crise de 2007 ont été particulièrement longs par rapport aux crises les plus récentes et les tensions économiques, les révoltes populaires sont nombreuses partout dans le monde, alors la prochaine crise risque de ne pas être très appréciée.

Source : les documents financiers que je traduis toute la journée.

Après, je vois pas en quoi c'est un scoop et pourquoi Radio Canada (que je n'écoute (ne regarde ?!) évidemment pas) prétendrait que tout va bien, vous n'êtes pas exactement la Corée du Nord...

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites
il y a 37 minutes, TheCrow a dit :

American Free Press (source:


The Southern Poverty Law Center considers it a hate group[7] and says that it "carries stories on Zionism, secret 'New World Order' conspiracies, American Jews and Israel."[8] One of the newspaper's ex-contract reporters, Christopher Bollyn, has advocated on behalf of the 9/11 Truth Movement.[9] The Anti-Defamation League has criticised the newspaper and, in particular, Bollyn for linking of prominent figures in the Jewish community with the events of September 11, 2001, and in September 2006 attacked the newspaper for disseminating "antisemitic propaganda".[10]

Pro-Israel conservative activists, such as Kenneth R. Timmerman, have criticized contributors to the American Free Press.[citation needed] In a May 2011 article, contributor Mark Dankof protested the British government's attempt to shut down Press TV,[11] blaming it on "media outlets and correspondents with provable connections to the American Jewish lobby; Israeli intelligence; and Neo-Conservatives thirsting for a War of Civilizations with Iran specifically, and the Islamic world generally."[12] In a May 2011 article, Dankof also quoted from and wrote that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion accurately reflect the state of the world. He lauded PressTV as one of the few exceptions to the Jewish control of the media.[13]

Zero Hedge (source:


Launch to 2014
In August 2009, under the pseudonym Tyler Durden, Ivandjiiski was interviewed on Bloomberg Radio on HFT.[54][55] By September 2009, Zero Hedge had begun drawing more traffic than some established financial blogs,[19] and Quantcast reported that the blog was getting 333,000 unique visitors a month (by 2018, it would be 40 million per month).[18] In September 2009, journalist Joe Hagan wrote that Zero Hedge's founder was "a zealous believer in a sweeping conspiracy that casts the alumni of Goldman Sachs as a powerful cabal at the helm of U.S. policy."[1] In September and October 2009, Financial journalists Felix Salmon and Justin Fox characterized the site as conspiratorial.[56][18] However, Justin Fox, went on to describe Ivandjiiski as "a wonderfully persistent investigative reporter" and credited him for successfully turning high-frequency trading "into a big political issue," but also termed most of the writing on the website as "half-baked hooey," albeit with some "truth to be gleaned from it."[18]

In his book, Griftopia (2010), Matt Taibbi cited Zero Hedge as having accurately assessed the level of corruption in the banking industry.[57] In January 2011, Zero Hedge was quoted in the Columbia Journalism Review regarding a JPMorgan-Ambac lawsuit: "JPM committed fraud through misrepresentation, then wilfully and maliciously traded against the entities it had sold misrepresented securities to."[58] In March 2011, Time magazine ranked Zero Hedge as 9th, in its 25 Best Financial Blogs,[39] with nominator, Bloomberg's Paul Kedrosky, stating that "So while I don't read Zero Hedge regularly—it's too bearish, too conspiratorial and too much of an intellectual monoculture—I like knowing that it exists. Any time I'm feeling like things might just turn out O.K. on planet Economic Earth, I know where to turn to be disabused of that stupid idea." Susanne Craig of The New York Times described Zero Hedge in October 2011 as "a well-read and controversial financial blog."[59]

In December 2012, Bank of America, which had been criticized by the site in the past, blocked its employees' access to Zero Hedge from BOA servers.[16]

2014 to 2018
In September 2014, the site was described by CNN Money as offering a "deeply conspiratorial, anti-establishment and pessimistic view of the world."[5]

In November 2014, Dr. Craig Pirrong, Professor of Finance at the University of Houston, stated: "I have frequently written that Zero Hedge has the MO of a Soviet agitprop operation, that it reliably peddles Russian propaganda: my first post on this, almost exactly three years ago, noted the parallels between Zero Hedge and Russia Today."[60][61] In December 2013, Zero Hedge accused Dr. Pirrong of being a "paid-for-Professor", who had "made a living of collecting "expert academic" fees by simply signing off on [wall street] memoranda", quoting a New York Times expose by David Kocieniewski into Dr. Pirrong.[62]

In September 2015, Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman described Zero Hedge as a scaremongering outlet that promotes fears of hyperinflation and an "obviously ridiculous" form of "monetary permahawkery."[64] In November 2012, Krugman had noted that Bill McBride of Calculated Risk, an economics blog, has treated Zero Hedge with "appropriate contempt".[65] Krugman has been one of the most vilified individuals on Zero Hedge, and the subject of over 703 articles (almost all negative) since inception,[48] due to Krugman's advocacy of Keynesian economics.[h][34]

In April 2016, as part of its expose from the Colin Lokey interview, Unmasking the Men Behind Zero Hedge, Wall Street's Renegade Blog, Bloomberg Markets stated that since its founding in the middle of the financial crisis, "Zero Hedge has grown from a blog to an Internet powerhouse. Often distrustful of the 'establishment' and almost always bearish, it's known for a pessimistic worldview. Posts entitled 'Stocks Are In a Far More Precarious State Than Was Ever Truly Believed Possible' and 'America's Entitled (And Doomed) Upper Middle Class' are not uncommon."[8]

In a May 2016 follow-up Bloomberg opinion piece, Noah Smith said: "Zero Hedge has become known as a source of cutting-edge news, rumors and gossip about the financial industry, as well as a haven for gold bugs, foes of the Federal Reserve and critics of high-frequency trading"; and also that: "But I've realized that the website is also something else—a kind of support group for financial industry workers who are worried about their own economic future in the face of sweeping changes in technology, regulation and demand".[7]

A May 2016 piece by Benjamin Wallace-Wells for The New Yorker magazine, also following up on the April 2016 Bloomberg unmasking article, described Zero Hedge as, "a blog that combines analysis of the financial markets, emphasizing the essential corruption of Wall Street".[11] As discussed in § Non-financial views, the article also associated the site with the alt-right, and of being pointedly Russophile.[11]

On 16 November 2017, Forbes listed Zero Hedge as one of its "100 Best Finance Twitter Accounts You Should Be Following"; Zero Hedge was one of nine of these 100 Twitter accounts that had a following of over 100,000 on Twitter (Zero Hedge had 440,000).[53] On 22 August 2018, Forbes also listed Zero Hedge as one of its "Top 17 Value Investing Blogs You Should Be Reading"[66]

On 12 March 2019, Bloomberg reported that Facebook had banned users from sharing Zero Hedge posts three days earlier.[67] MarketWatch, noting that Zero Hedge is a "frequent critic of Facebook", reported that the ban was lifted later that day with Facebook saying that the ban was a "mistake with our automation to detect spam".[68] Business Insider, describing Zero Hedge as "a favorite of City and Wall Street traders, known for its anti-establishment and bearish slant on financial topics", noted that Donald Trump Jr and Nigel Farage raised objections to Facebook's censure of Zero Hedge.[69]

On 20 November 2019, NBC News reported Zero Hedge as the initial source of a "misleading claim about the head of the Ukrainian energy company at the heart of the House impeachment inquiry", which went viral during the impeachment hearings. NBC said that "ZeroHedge apparently misconstrued the original Russian article from the Interfax-Ukraine News Agency, which did not mention an indictment. The Interfax-Ukraine News Agency operates as part of Interfax, a Russian news outlet".[13]

Rebel News (Source:


The Rebel Media was formed by Levant and Lilley following the closure of the Sun News Network. Levant said that his online production would be unencumbered by the regulatory and distribution difficulties faced by Sun News Network and that its lower production costs would make it more viable.[25] Levant has cited Breitbart, the American far-right news hub, as an inspiration.[26] A crowdfunding campaign raised roughly $100,000 for the project.[27] The site soon attracted a number of other former Sun News Network personalities such as David Menzies, Paige MacPherson, Faith Goldy, Patrick Moore and, briefly, Michael Coren.[28]

In the summer of 2015, the channel, led by Levant, launched a campaign to boycott Tim Hortons, a chain of Canadian coffee shops, after it rejected in-store ads from Enbridge due to complaints from customers opposed to the oil pipeline projects being promoted by the ads.[29]

In early 2016, the Alberta government banned The Rebel Media's correspondents from press briefings on the grounds that, because Ezra Levant had testified in court in 2014 that he was a columnist or commentator rather than a reporter, none of his current correspondents could be considered to be journalists. On 17 February 2016, the government admitted that it made a mistake and said that it would allow The Rebel Media correspondents into press briefings.[30] The Canadian Association of Journalists supported preventing government from choosing journalism coverage."[31]

In late 2016, The Rebel Media advocated for accreditation by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to permit its access as journalists to their event. The Rebel Media had previously published articles claiming that the public is being deceived about climate change.[citation needed]

Rebel Media did receive support from the federal Canadian government and three journalism organizations and eventually was granted access by the UN.[32]

Following the Quebec City mosque shooting on 29 January 2017, Rebel promoted a conspiracy theory that the shooting was perpetrated by Muslims.[33][34] In 2017, Rebel Media hired as its British correspondent far-right activist Tommy Robinson, founder of the avowedly anti-Islamic English Defence League. Robinson was convicted of mortgage fraud and using a friend's passport to enter the US.[35][36][37][38]

In March 2017, one of their correspondents, Gavin McInnes, made controversial comments defending Holocaust deniers, accused the Jews of being responsible for the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles, and said he was "becoming anti-Semitic". He later said his comments were taken out of context.[39] McInnes also produced a satirical[40] video for Rebel called "Ten Things I Hate about Jews", later retitled "Ten Things I Hate About Israel".[41][42]

During the 2017 French Presidential Election, Jack Posobiec, The Rebel Media's Washington, D.C. bureau chief, supported far right leader Marine Le Pen and played a role in the 2017 Macron e-mail leaks.[43]

Lauren Southern left the organization in March 2017.[44]

Blowback over coverage of the Unite the Right Rally
Co-founder Brian Lilley quit the Rebel on 12 August 2017, following the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, writing, "What anyone from The Rebel was doing at a so-called 'unite the right' rally that was really an anti-Semitic white power rally is beyond me. Especially not a rally dedicated to keeping up a statue of Robert E. Lee, a man that whatever else he stood for, also fought on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of America’s bloodiest conflict." Lilley accused The Rebel of exhibiting a "lack of editorial and behavioural judgment that left unchecked will destroy it and those around it."[10]

Freelancers Barbara Kay and John Robson also quit the Rebel, and the company was denounced by Conservative MP Michael Chong and Alberta politician Doug Schweitzer of the United Conservative Party.[45][18] Chong, Chris Alexander,[18] Peter Kent, Lisa Raitt, and former interim leader Rona Ambrose had previously disavowed the site.[46][47]

Brian Jean, Jason Kenney, and Doug Schweitzer, who are running for the leadership of the United Conservative Party of Alberta, have condemned the Rebel and said they will no longer grant interviews to the company.[48]

Faith Goldy, a former journalist and online show host of the Rebel, was fired on 17 August 2017, for her participation in a podcast associated with The Daily Stormer.[49] In the course of reporting on the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Goldy argued that they suggested a wider "rising white racial consciousness" in America and characterizing a manifesto by white supremacist Richard Spencer that called for organizing states along racial lines as "robust" and "well thought-out."[17]

Gavin McInnes left the Rebel at the end of August 2017. Levant wrote “We tried to keep him, but he was lured away by a major competitor that we just couldn’t outbid" in an email to the independent news site Canadaland.[50][51] In February 2019, after suing the Southern Poverty Law Center for allegedly damaging his reputation and career prospect by characterizing the Proud Boys as a hate group, McInnes announced that he is once again hired by the media group.[24]

British contributor Caolan Robertson no longer works for the Rebel.[51] Robertson claims he was fired for "knowing too much" about the Rebel's finances, claiming the company dishonestly solicited donations for projects that were already funded and concealing how that money was spent.[51] He also claimed that Southern was fired for refusing to tape a fundraising appeal for the Rebel's Israel trip after fundraising targets had already been met. Robertson also played audio of Levant offering him thousands of dollars of what Levant himself called "hush money". Levant denies these allegations and says he will present evidence opposing this in court, claiming that he was being "blackmailed" by Robertson and his partner.[3][52][53][54] Levant has since briefly talked about The Rebel's finances in his online show and released a summary on The Rebel's website.[55][56] It was reported that person that negotiated the settlement is the former director of communication for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Kory Teneycke.[57]

Boycott by the Conservative Party of Canada
During the 2017 Conservative Party leadership race, many contenders, including the eventual leadership winner Andrew Scheer, gave interviews to the outlet.[58]

After the 2017 Conservative Party leadership race, it was revealed that Scheer's campaign manager Hamish Marshall's IT firm Torch provided IT services to The Rebel Media. In 2015, Marshall told the National Observer, that he was only involved in the business side of the Rebel.[59] Marshall explained to that he had left the Rebel after the leadership race ended to avoid a conflict of interest.[60] In September 2017 Marshall's name was removed from the list of directors of The Rebel Media on the federal government's online registry of corporate information.[59] On 16 October 2017, The Globe and Mail asked Scheer if he knew that Hamish Marshall shared office space with the Rebel during the leadership campaign. Scheer replied that he did not ask Mashall about his firm's many clients. Later, a spokesperson clarified that Scheer did not know the specifics of the arrangement. Levant explained that Marshall's IT firm Torch provided client services for the Rebel.[61] A 2017 National Post article argued that Marshall implemented the Rebel donation system.[26] Scheer told Maclean's in 2018, that Marshall past relationship with the Rebel should not be conflated with his selection as campaign chair.[62]

Scheer denounced the outlet due to its coverage of the Unite the Right rally;,[63] and stated that he would stop doing interviews with The Rebel Media until its “editorial directions" changed.[51][58] The day after Scheer stated that he would not be granting interview with the Rebel going forward in an interview with the National Post.[64]

Project Veritas (Source:


Project Veritas is an American right-wing activist group.[1][2][3][4] The group uses "disguises and hidden cameras to uncover supposed liberal bias and corruption."[1] The group is known for producing deceptively edited videos about media organizations and left-leaning groups.[5][2][6][7][8][9][10] In a 2018 book on propaganda and disinformation in U.S. politics, three Harvard University scholars refer to Project Veritas as a "right-wing disinformation outfit."[11]


Project Veritas was founded in 2010 by James O'Keefe.[12]

The organization has produced deceptively edited videos targeted against ACORN, NPR and others.[13][14][15] During the 2016 campaign, the organization falsely claimed to have shown that the Hillary Clinton campaign accepted illegal donations from foreign sources.[16]

O'Keefe was sued for defamation by a man he wrongfully depicted as a "willing participant in an underage sex-trafficking scheme"; the suit led to a settlement in 2013, in which O'Keefe issued an apology and paid $100,000.[17]

In 2017, Project Veritas was caught in a failed attempt to trick the The Washington Post into posting a fabricated story about Roy Moore.[2][3][18][19] Rather than uncritically publish a story that accused Republican candidate Moore of impregnating a teenager, The Washington Post critically examined the story that they were presented with, checked the source, assessed her credibility and ultimately found that there was no merit to her claims, and that instead Project Veritas were trying to dupe The Washington Post.[11]

O'Keefe has been barred from fundraising for Project Veritas in Florida and other states because of his federal criminal record for entering a federal building under fraudulent pretenses.[20][21]

Je n'ai rien trouvé sur les deux trucs français, mais lorsque l'on tape "Planetes360" sur Google, on tombe sur "Extrème Droite sur Internet". 

Essentiellement, tes sources crédibles ce sont des think tanks de la alt-right. En d'autres termes, ce sont des conneries conspirationnistes maintes et maintes fois déboutées par de vrais spécialistes. Ce n'est juste pas sérieux, ce n'est pas basé sur des faits, ce sont essentiellement des conneries paranoaïques qui ne s'appuient sur rien de solide. Ils prennent des faits de base qu'ils tournent dans tous les sens pour essayer de fitter avec leurs théories loufoques. 

Évidemment, comme tout bon conspirationniste, tu vas me dire que Wikipedia n'est pas crédible... que les médias de masse discrédite ces publications parce qu'elles disent la vérité et que les médias de masse sont à la botte des puissants, etc. Je te répondrai que pour faire ton jugement, tu dois regarder la méthodologie et non ce qui est rapporté. Est-ce qu'il y a des sources crédibles? Est-ce qu'il y a validation par des pairs? Est-ce qu'on s'efforce de corroborer plusieurs sources CRÉDIBLES! Oui, les médias de masse sont souvent biaisés. Ils prennent les faits et leur donnent une tournure partisane. Cependant, il est assez facile de les "fact checks"; ils listent la plupart du temps leurs sources, ils contre-vérifient à plusieurs endroits, etc. Bref, ils ne publient pas n'importe quoi. 

Radio-Canada, c'est sérieux. Tes trucs, c'est du délire. C'est de la rhétorique construite de façon à appeler aux émotions; à faire peur. Ça s'appuie sur des préconceptions de l'extrême droite (ex: c'est la faute des Juifs) et ça tisse un toile bizaroïdes en liant entre eux des trucs qui n'ont pas vraiment de lien et en utilisant de grandes conspirations comme fil conducteur. Ainsi, on peut "fact check" chacun des petits éléments et voir que c'est "vrai"... mais l'argumentaire ne fait aucun sens logique. 

Cela veut-il dire qu'il faille aveuglement avaler le "spin" de Radio-Canada (ou de tout autre média)? Non. Mais il ne faut quand même pas devenir parano. Évidemment, la défense facile que l'on voit tout le temps lorsque l'on attaque ce type de publication c'est "tu dis ça parce qu'ils présentent une autre vision que la tienne". C'est un cop out beaucoup trop facile. La force de ces trucs, c'est qu'il n'y a pas d'argumentaire solide, c'est un acte de foi. C'est comme s'obstiner avec des religieux. "Dieu a créé la Terre en 6 jours puis s'est reposé le 7e", "Non, cite une théorie X appuyée sur des faits" "Lol, non, DIEU! HÉRÉTIQUE"

M'enfin, tu crois ce que tu veux et que t'abreuves de nouvelles où tu veux, mais je t'encourage fortement à étudier la méthodologie des médias que tu consultes.

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites

Après, je pense que c'est sain de diversifier ses sources. Perso, je lis aussi bien des journaux de droite que très à gauche, même si la lecture des seconds m'hérisse généralement les poils tout le long. Tu peux trouver des choses intéressantes dans des sources que certains vont trouver douteuses, ce qui compte c'est ce que tu en fais par rapport à tout ce que tu peux lire d'autre. C'est pour ça que ce serait plus intéressant si tu détaillais davantage le fond de tes pensées (même si je capte que pondre une brique que personne va lire peut ne ne pas t'attirer), parce que là, ils vont simplement comparer tes sources aux leurs et prendre pour argent comptant ce que l'ont dit dessus.

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites
il y a 3 minutes, Daleko a dit :

C'est pour ça que ce serait plus intéressant si tu détaillais davantage le fond de tes pensées

J'arrête pas de dire depuis des années que je suis centre-droite. Ce qui devrait, en principe, définir clairement ma position. Mais pour des raisons obscures, on dirais que le centre a complètement disparu du tableau. T'es de gauche, ou d'extrême droite. Le centre n'existe plus.

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites

Mais ça veut pas dire grand chose ça. Ici, le centre-droit, c'est Macron. J'ai cru comprendre que tu le kiffais pas tellement. Et personne n'est d'accord sur tout au sein d'une famille politique. Je me considère de droite, pourtant je suis pro mariage-gay, PMA, dépénalisation du cannabis, etc. Tout ça n'a aucun sens.

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites
il y a 33 minutes, Daleko a dit :

Mais ça veut pas dire grand chose ça. Ici, le centre-droit, c'est Macron. J'ai cru comprendre que tu le kiffais pas tellement. Et personne n'est d'accord sur tout au sein d'une famille politique. Je me considère de droite, pourtant je suis pro mariage-gay, PMA, dépénalisation du cannabis, etc. Tout ça n'a aucun sens.

Il faut faire attention pour ne pas mélanger "droite sociale" et "droite économique".

Et même ces amalgames là, ça vaut ce que ça vaut. La droite et la gauche, pour ce que ça vaut vraiment dire...

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites
il y a 22 minutes, MattIsGoD a dit :

Il faut faire attention pour ne pas mélanger "droite sociale" et "droite économique".

Et même ces amalgames là, ça vaut ce que ça vaut. La droite et la gauche, pour ce que ça vaut vraiment dire...

Oui, puis mes exemples étaient mauvais. Je suis aussi pro-peine de mort, anti-avortement et pro-gilets jaunes. Je pense que c'est assez rare les gens qui fittent complètement dans une catégorie.

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites
Il y a 2 heures, Ecce Homo a dit :

t'es riche !

Bah, pas tant que ça quand même. Mais ça va donner un bon coup de main à mes enfants quand je serai de l'autre bord. (Je ferai pas un centenaire...)

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites
Il y a 7 heures, TheCrow a dit :

Nous ne sommes jamais sorti de la crise de 2008. Tout est maintenu artificiellement depuis tout ce temps. Et on arrive en fin de cycle. D'ici un an ou deux, la FED ne pourra plus compenser.

Ça être bien pire qu'en 2008. Et avec Trudeau ici qui se fout complètement de l'économie, le Canada n'y échappera pas cette fois.

On est pas mal safe au Québec pareil, comme tout est entrain de s'écrouler puisqu'on est la république des bananes du Canada, bah, on verra pas la prochaine récession. On est tellement en retard sur le reste du Canada, qu'on s'évertue a rebâtir, et a essayé de rattraper les autres provinces, qui elles se sont déjà mis à stagner. 

Lien à poster
Partager sur d’autres sites

Un déchet à ajouter?

Il faudra cliquer là ou là.

Devenir éboueur

L'inscription est gratuite, rapide et presque pas humiliante.

Je suis prêt!

Se connecter

Supposant bien sûr que vous ne soyez pas déjà banni.

Je veux revenir!
  • Échantillon aléatoire d'images jetées dans cette poubelle

  • Créer...