Sputnik Will Be Broadcast in 30 Languages Next Year

RogerB

Crusader
This new internet and radio network out of Russia may or may not contain anything on Scientology going forward . . . but what it will contain is information we would be wise to be up to date on as international political and economic events unfold that will have a huge impact on us as individuals.

At least, it will be a counter-balance to the lies and propaganda fed us by the US and EU main stream media. And this point I feel is of immense importance . . . for too long, we in the west have only had the predominance of one source of information and it has warped the minds of those who succumbed to it.

This morning the launch of the network was reported in the WSJ . . .

It is currently live in English only.

Here is the Russian RT news release on it:
http://rt.com/news/204231-sputnik-news-agency-launched/

Ahhh, and found the direct link to the network itself: http://sputniknews.com/
(looking good, baby!)

Internet News Network
Sputnik Will Be Broadcast in 30 Languages Next Year

(here an image of the network and its logo exists in the original report but it won't link across . . . . its buzz-line is: Telling the Untold. I love it!)

By ANTON TROIANOVSKI in Berlin and
GREGORY L. WHITE in Moscow

Updated Nov. 10, 2014 7:46 p.m. ET11 COMMENTS

Russia unveiled a new initiative to spread Moscow’s message by radio and Internet in 30 different languages, the latest effort in the Kremlin’s intensifying information war with the West.

A new website launched Monday, and so far available only in English, features U.S.-bashing columns such as “Presidential Crimes: Then and Now,” which likens the Department of Homeland Security to the Nazis’ Gestapo secret police.

The radio and online effort will complement the Kremlin’s growingtelevision news outlet, RT, which launched a German website on Thursday, started a U.K.-focused English language channel in late October, and has plans to expand into a French-language website and television channel.

The new radio broadcasts and foreign-language websites will be run out of offices in 25 major cities around the world—including Beijing, Berlin and Washington—with 30 to 100 staff members each, according to an announcement from the state agency overseeing the project.

The network of radio stations and websites, the release said, will broadcast in 30 languages next year and be called Sputnik. The name, echoing the moniker of the first space satellite that the Soviet Union launched in 1957, also harks back to an era when Moscow was building a web of foreign-language outlets to drum up sympathy for its cause while undermining the U.S.

Russia has been scrambling to modernize and expand that Cold War-era propaganda apparatus, especially since the Ukraine crisis has sparked a new confrontation between Moscow and the West.
The funding in Russia’s federal budget for RT, a news channel launched under the name Russia Today in 2005, is being increased to about $340 million next year from about $250 million this year, according to government documents and an RT spokeswoman.

The government funding for newly established state news agency Rossiya Segodnya, which is producing Sputnik, will total about $140 million next year. While Russia already has some foreign-language radio broadcasts that are largely produced out of Moscow, the new initiative will involve more local staff in more locations, according to Rossiya Segodnya director general Dmitry Kiselyov.

The investments in such projects come as the Kremlin has been steadily tightening control over the media inside Russia. Such measures include a new law that bans foreigners from owning more than 20% of any Russian media asset.

Citing such moves, CNN’s parent company, Turner International, said Monday that the cable news operation was suspending broadcasting in Russia. In the meantime, “Turner International is assessing its distribution options for CNN in Russia in light of recent changes in Russian media legislation,” the company said. It said CNN’s Moscow news bureau wouldn’t be affected by the decision.

Russian officials say the media efforts within and outside the country are necessary to counter what both Russian PresidentVladimir Putin and Rossiya Segodnya’s director general Dmitry Kiselyov, Russia’s most prominent pro-Kremlin news media figure, describe as a global media landscape dominated by news outlets toeing the U.S. line.

“Total control of the global mass media has made it possible, when desired, to portray white as black and black as white,” Mr. Putin said at a meeting with international scholars and journalists in Sochi, Russia, last month.


The international media push shows how Mr. Putin is trying to position Russia as a leading anti-U.S. voice on the world stage as his confrontation with the West deepens. While leaders in Europe and Washington have cast the violence in Ukraine largely as Russia’s doing, Mr. Putin and Russian state media blame the U.S. for inciting an anti-Russian revolt in the country.

full report here . . . it just gets better and better! :biggrin:

///
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
This new internet and radio network out of Russia may or may not contain anything on Scientology going forward . . . but what it will contain is information we would be wise to be up to date on as international political and economic events unfold that will have a huge impact on us as individuals.

At least, it will be a counter-balance to the lies and propaganda fed us by the US and EU main stream media. And this point I feel is of immense importance . . . for too long, we in the west have only had the predominance of one source of information and it has warped the minds of those who succumbed to it.

Are you saying that the Russian media will be less "lies and propaganda" than Western media?
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Are you saying that the Russian media will be less "lies and propaganda" than Western media?

I think it will. Is, in fact, comparing RT to Western media. Although it can be hard to discern the truth when RT says one thing and Western media says the opposite: one has to weigh the evidence (if there is any) and the past history of the topics concerned.

I'm not talking about all Russian media. The last time I looked at Pravda it seemed to be the Russian equivalent of the marvellous now-defunct Weekly World News, source of such illuminating articles as the one on Bat Child, complete with photograph.

coverbatboy.jpg


Link to WWN cover images (hopefully):

https://www.google.com/search?q=Wee...aAI&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1425&bih=887#imgdii=_

Paul
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
I'm sure the Russian media will be talked about.

Article about Russia paying people to write positive online comments:

Russia's Online-Comment Propaganda Army:
(snip)
I don't get too worked up—Internet haters gonna hate, as we all know—but given the outlandishness of their responses (even their fellow angry commenters often try to take them down a notch), it leaves me wondering, "Who are these people?"

Now, it seems, we have an answer to where some of this acrimony originates. It's of course impossible to tell whose vitriol is genuine and whose is being bankrolled, but at least some anti-Western comments appear to come from staffers the Russian government pays to sit in a room, surf the Internet, and leave sometimes hundreds of postings a day that criticize the country's opposition and promote Kremlin-backed policymakers.

Russian news site the St. Petersburg Times describes the story of one woman, Natalya Lvova, who said she attended a job interview in August at a “posh cottage with glass walls” in a village near St. Petersburg:

“To my question about a technical task—what exactly should be written in the comments—a young guy, a coordinator, told me, briefly and clearly, that they were having busy days at the moment and that yesterday they all wrote in support of [Moscow acting mayor Sergei] Sobyanin, while ‘today we shit on Navalny,’” she wrote on her VKontakte [ed: a Russian social network] page.

According to Lvova, each commenter was to write no less than 100 comments a day, while people in the other room were to write four postings a day, which then went to the other employees whose job was to post them on social networks as widely as possible.

Of course, the article in The Atlantic may itself be anti-Russian propaganda. That's the real problem in this case: being able to tell about sources

A) who is telling the truth,
B) who is spouting false info thinking it's the truth,
C) who is spouting false info for pay or ideological reasons,
D) who is just pulling nonsense out his butt for the sake of having something to say​

ALSO: Documents Show How Russia’s Troll Army Hit America

ADDING: it's not just governments which do it: Samsung fined for paying people to write negative comments about competitor's phone
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
I'm sure the Russian media will be talked about.

Article about Russia paying people to write positive online comments:

Russia's Online-Comment Propaganda Army:


Of course, the article in The Atlantic may itself be anti-Russian propaganda. That's the real problem in this case: being able to tell about sources

A) who is telling the truth,
B) who is spouting false info thinking it's the truth,
C) who is spouting false info for pay or ideological reasons,
D) who is just pulling nonsense out his butt for the sake of having something to say​

ALSO: Documents Show How Russia’s Troll Army Hit America

ADDING: it's not just governments which do it: Samsung fined for paying people to write negative comments about competitor's phone

When I was a teenager I used to love comparing The Voice Of America with Radio Peking and Radio Moscow and occasionally BBC World Service. At the middle of the cold war the propaganda war was most entertaining. Much western press is owned by Murdoch, I don't know RT's ownership, it sounds like it's state owned. When I was first in London there were free newspaper stands where you could pick up a Russian free propaganda paper telling you how many tons of wheat were produced in the Ukraine and how many tractors produced in a factory in Siberia. It was like reading the Auditor mag or listening to the little one's event speeches, meaningless soulless cold facts mostly fabricated. RT is better than the old propaganda and does expose some hidden stuff which is of value. Free press it's not, but then nor is Fox News.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
When I was a teenager I used to love comparing The Voice Of America with Radio Peking and Radio Moscow and occasionally BBC World Service. At the middle of the cold war the propaganda war was most entertaining. Much western press is owned by Murdoch, I don't know RT's ownership, it sounds like it's state owned. When I was first in London there were free newspaper stands where you could pick up a Russian free propaganda paper telling you how many tons of wheat were produced in the Ukraine and how many tractors produced in a factory in Siberia. It was like reading the Auditor mag or listening to the little one's event speeches, meaningless soulless cold facts mostly fabricated. RT is better than the old propaganda and does expose some hidden stuff which is of value. Free press it's not, but then nor is Fox News.

There is a value in having multiple news outlets of opposing viewpoints.

Lying outright is risky. Once a lie is documented as being false, your credibility is damaged. The primary way of skewing people's perceptions of events, is to not mention things that go against the narrative you are promoting, while giving lots of attention to events that advance your preferred narrative. The solution to propaganda, then, is to get news from multiple sources, and pay particular attention to stories which are only being covered by one source, or where stories conflict.

As far as Fox News is concerned, it generates much angst amongst the Left, even though it is just one of many media outlets (competing in cable news against CNN and MSNBC, plus "comedy" shows that cover the news and do political commentary, like Bill Maher and Jon Stewart). The reason is that Fox covers stories that the other news outlets would prefer people not hear about. Possibly for this reason, the two Fox cable stations have more viewers than the CNN and NBC stations combined.

PS: yes RT(Russia Today) is funded by the Russian government.

Further adding: Former RT reporter on RT propaganda, as reported in the UK Guardian.
 
Last edited:

oneonewasaracecar

Gold Meritorious Patron
It is being broadcast in 30 languages and you are saying it is not propaganda?

According to the CIA factbook this is the breakdown of languages in Russia.

Russian (official) 96.3%, Dolgang 5.3%, German 1.5%, Chechen 1%, Tatar 3%, other 10.3%
note: shares sum to more than 100% because some respondents gave more than one answer on the census (2010 est.)

So you have 5 languages spoken by the vast majority of the population. So what are the other 25 languages for? Hmm.

Let's see, Putin has invaded Georgia, invaded the Ukraine and now he is about to sell nuclear reactor components to Iran.

Maybe he is broadcasting propaganda to justify a fascist expansionist state.

If the enemy of my enemy is Putin, he is still not my friend. Russia has annexed two countries in the last few decades. America has not. A little perspective is due.

The USA defeated Hitler and the USSR. Putin is himself a fascist dictator with nuclear weapons who is on a bloody rampage across Europe. You want to think that his propaganda is an alternative to the US media? Be serious. He is a KGB thug, bringing out a new version of Pravda to help smooth over the tarnished image of his brutal regime. Wake up.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
...The primary way of skewing people's perceptions of events, is to not mention things that go against the narrative you are promoting...

A recent example of this, regarding certain embarrassing statements by Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber:
After a video clip showing economist Jonathan Gruber describing the passage of Obamacare as based intentional deceit went viral, the University of Pennsylvania deleted it. The Daily Caller writes,

Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber had said at the University of Pennsylvania’s 24th Annual Health Economics Conference that it was a good thing that Americans never realized what was in the Affordable Care Act, because “the stupidity of the American voter” would have otherwise killed the law.

But for unexplained reasons, the University of Pennsylvania has pulled its video of the event, which took place in October of 2013. ”This video has been removed by the user,” a message now reads. “Sorry about that.” The video is still embedded on the conference page, but playing the video gives a similar error message.

One person who was angry to hear of the apparent cover-up was Bloomberg columnist Megan McArdle. “This is pretty shocking behavior by my alma mater,” she tweeted, “Why would @Penn pull down a public video that has political implications?”​

Gruber’s message was unflattering. Avik Roy at Forbes writes: “Gruber made an argument that many of Obamacare’s critics have long made, including me. It’s that the law’s complex system of insurance regulation is a way of concealing from voters what Obamacare really is: a huge redistribution of wealth from the young and healthy to the old and unhealthy. In the video, Gruber points out that if Democrats had been honest about these facts, and that the law’s individual mandate is in effect a major tax hike, Obamacare would never have passed Congress.”

But since Obamacare is ‘progressive’ can’t we make the ugly past go away? Obamacare’s proponents believe it was intended in virtue, however much it was conceived in sin. Or as Gruber put it: “Look, I wish Mark was right that we could make it all transparent, but I’d rather have this law than not.” To argue we have no right to know what Gruber said in Penn State seminars is to assert privacy. But that is not the same as asserting Gruber said nothing. When Sheryl Attkisson says that “CBS News bosses purposely hid a clip of President Obama refusing to call the Benghazi attacks an act of terrorism in order to help him get re-elected” that’s not protecting classified information; that’s a delete operation.
 

RogerB

Crusader
Anybody actually been on the extant, cited, website?

Oh, by the way, as to the incomprehensible comment on "why 30 languages" . . . the network wishes to communicate to the rest of the world outside of Russia . . . it is on the worldwide web: umm, internet.

In any event looking at the site yesterday to get a sense of its flavor and validity, I see several rather very lucid posts . . .

This first one by a Washington insider and former WSJ columnist . . . here blowing the whistle on American lies . . . .

Washington Is Defaming Putin

25.10.2014(updated 12:48 06.11.2014) by Paul Craig Roberts

On October 24 at the Valdai International Discussion Club meeting in Sochi, Russia’s President Putin correctly and justifiably denounced Washington for destabilizing the world in order to serve its own narrow and selfish interest and the interests of the private interest groups that control Washington at the expense of the rest of the world.

ATLANTA, October 25 (RIA Novosti) — On October 24 at the Valdai International Discussion Club meeting in Sochi, Russia’s President Putin correctly and justifiably denounced Washington for destabilizing the world in order to serve its own narrow and selfish interest and the interests of the private interest groups that control Washington at the expense of the rest of the world. It is about time a world leader denounced the thuggish neocon regime in Washington. Putin described Washington’s double standardswith the Roman phrase: “What is allowed for God [the US] is not allowed for cattle [the rest of the world].”

Curiously, the Russian media has not, at this time of writing, produced an English translation of Putin’s full remarks. Perhaps the Russian media do not realize the importance of Putin’s words. Too much of the Russian media is owned by foreign interests who use the access to Russian readers to attack and discredit the Russian government. It is amazing that the Russian government allows Washington’s propaganda within its own ranks. Perhaps Moscow accepts Washington’s propaganda among Russians in order to protect the broadcasts in the US of RIA Novosti, RT and Voice of Russia. But the balance is uneven. The Russian broadcasts in the West report otherwise unreported news; they do not defame America.

I did not see any reporting of Putin’s address in the US print and TV media. Clearly in the US there is an absence of public discussion of US foreign policy and foreign reaction to it. A country in which propaganda and silence rule out awareness and public discussion is not a democracy regardless of what it calls itself.

Washington long ago learned the dark art of silencing truth with defamation. Washington used defamation to overthrow Iran’s elected leader, Mossadegh in 1953, to overthrow Congo’s prime minister Patrice Lumumba in 1960, to overthrow Guatemala’s President Arbenz in 1954, to overthrow Venezuela’s President Hugo Chevez in 2002, a coup that was cancelled by the Venezuelan people and military who threw out Washington’s stooge replacement and reinstalled Chavez, to overthrow Ukraine’s elected President Yanukovych in 2013, to overthrow Honduras President Manuel Zelaya in 2009, to overthrow in 2013 Mohamed Morsi, president of the first democratically elected government in Egypt’s history, to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, in ongoing efforts to overthrow Assad in Syria and the government of Iran, and in failed attempts to overthrow Indonesia’s Sukarno, Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, and Castro in Cuba.

Today Washington’s target is Vladimir Putin. This is the height of folly and hubris. Putin’s public support far exceeds that of any American president in history. Currently, the level of public support for the Obama regime and the US Congress is far too low to be compatible with a functioning democracy. If the US is actually a democracy, it is the most dysfunctional democracy in world history. Practically no one, except the powerful private interest groups who own Washington, supports the US government. Everyone else despises Washington.

Snipped . . . more at link

I'll link the other useful posts with my comments . . . . only for those who are really interested, of course. The rest can wank-off. I already see the usual parade of attempts to fraudulently discredit what is likely to be made available to the world by this new endeavor.

For me, I like to analyse all the available and presented data. And I know there are some among us who do not go along with being spoon fed what to think but prefer to see the present time actuality rather than hang up in past prejudices or delusionary futures as presented by those who only dump one-liner opinions on these threads.

R
 

RogerB

Crusader
As to the think that the "weak ruble" is hurting Russia :duh: They are actually taking ADVANTAGE of it!

Ruble Weak Enough to Keep Balance of Payments: Russian Central Bank

7:52 07.11.2014(updated 20:09 07.11.2014) 1700

The Russian Central Bank also warned that a period of possible volatility of ruble rate may follow as the currency market adjusts itself to the changes in the exchange-rate regime.

MOSCOW, November 7 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian Central Bank sees no need to further weaken the ruble in order to keep the balance of payments in equilibrium, the regulator said in a statement Friday.

"Taking into account the measures taken and the recent decline in the exchange rate, further weakening of the ruble is not required to keep the balance of payments in equilibrium," the Central Bank said.

The Central Bank also warned that a period of possible volatility of ruble rate may follow as the currency market adjusts itself to the changes in the exchange-rate regime.

"The process of currency market's adjustment to a new exchange-rate regime mechanism may take some time, during which the exchange rate may experience certain fluctuations," the statement said.

Russia's national currency, the ruble, has lost a quarter of its value since the beginning of 2014.

The weakening of the ruble spiked this week after the Central Bank announced on November 5 it had dramatically reduced its support for the national currency pursuing the transition to the so-called "free floating" currency exchange policy.

In mid-October, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the Central Bank would adopt a floating exchange rate starting from 2015.

These comments following I extracted from The Daily Telegraph (London). It’s one of those “balanced articles” . . . that is, it purports to present all sides of the subject addressed.

These comments are very telling:

Crucially, the bank vowed to act with force against “financial stability threats”. It will tighten rouble liquidity used by local speculators for bets on the dollar, evoking punishing memories of the 2008 crisis, when overnight rates briefly punched to 3,000pc and scorched those caught on the wrong side of the trade. “Rouble liquidity is being used for games on the currency markets,” said Elvira Nabiulina, the bank’s governor.

One hedge fund manager said traders were wary of a sudden counter-strike by the authorities. “Russia can still put up a good fight. We can argue over whether Russia has enough reserves in the end, but it certainly has enough to destroy your position as a trader on any given day if it wants to. We’re not talking about Nigeria or Ghana here,” he said.

These comments speak to what I mentioned yesterday that, if Russia chooses, it could cause colossal economic damage to the west.
 

RogerB

Crusader
Of course we saw the unthinking (or was it really unthinking?) dumping of the western MSM touted propaganda of the report of "a massive military incursion into Ukraine by Russia" (instantly countered by the Pentagon saying "we have no evidence of it")

Here is some Russian perspective:

Russian Defense Ministry stated that NATO claims of Russian military convoys crossing the border with Ukraine are false.

MOSCOW, November 12 (RIA Novosti) – NATO allegations of Russian military convoys crossing the border with Ukraine are completely untrue, the Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday.

Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said the rumors of alleged Russian military presence in Ukraine "are not backed by any facts.”

“We have already stopped paying attention to these baseless allegations,” he said.

While on the other side of the coin . . . and this is the tip of the iceberg of reports of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the current regime in Kiev . . .

17:11 12.11.2014(updated 17:59 12.11.2014)

Human Rights Watch reported about use of cluster munition rockets during official ceasefire in Donetsk.

GENEVA, November 12 (RIA Novosti) – Cluster munition rockets were fired at the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk during an official ceasefire in early October from positions held by the Kiev government forces, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a report presented Wednesday.

“The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that these rockets were fired from the government-held positions,” the international rights organization said.

“All the cluster munition attacks in Donetsk took place within one kilometer of a government institution apparently held by rebel forces, which might have been the target,” the report read.

At least five Uragan cluster munition rockets hit central Donetsk on October 2 and 5, according to the HRW report.

The document indicated that the location of submunition impact craters in the city made it “unlikely” that the rockets came from the east, north or west, the areas said to be controlled by militias. “There is only one direction consistent with all the impact craters, and therefore points to use by Ukrainian forces,” the report stated.

According to the paper, a New York Times journalist investigating the sites photographed submunitions and numerous rocket remnants, including fragments of 9N210 submunitions.

During one of these attacks, a 38-year-old Swiss Red Cross worker was killed. His body was found between two craters, which “appeared consistent with cluster munition explosions,” HRW said.

The report cited witnesses saying rockets were fired at Donetsk from the southwest. HRW added that from their different vantage points local residents appeared to describe the same launching spot inside an area under the control of Ukrainian government forces.

According to the report, a HRW team visited the village of Novomykhailivka, southwest of Donetsk, and found the remnants of three Uragan cluster munition rockets and one Smerch rocket that had apparently malfunctioned shortly after launch.

“The presence of these misfired cluster munition rockets clearly establishes the flight path of the attack, confirming that the rockets were fired from a government-held area south of Novomykhailivka,” the document asserted.

The HRW report condemned “the indiscriminate, and unlawful, nature of the use of cluster munitions in populated areas”, saying that ceasefire violations by one party did not excuse violations by the other party.

Cluster munitions contain dozens or hundreds of submunitions. After the launch of a cluster bomb a container opens up and disperses submunitions, making them spread over a wide area endangering anyone in the vicinity. So far, 114 countries have joined a treaty, banning cluster munitions. Ukraine is not a party to the treaty.

A ceasefire is officially still in place between pro-Kiev forces and local militias in eastern Ukraine, though the sides have repeatedly accused each other of breaching the truce.

I point these events out because we are fast approaching the point where they are going to impact your comfort (at least) and economic well-being (certainly).

Rog


 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
Of course we saw the unthinking (or was it really unthinking?) dumping of the western MSM touted propaganda of the report of "a massive military incursion into Ukraine by Russia" (instantly countered by the Pentagon saying "we have no evidence of it")

Here is some Russian perspective:



While on the other side of the coin . . . and this is the tip of the iceberg of reports of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the current regime in Kiev . . .



I point these events out because we are fast approaching the point where they are going to impact your comfort (at least) and economic well-being (certainly).

Rog



Then there is an alarming growing of far right wing groups in EU, pretty much unreported in the UK. There are anti ethnic anti minority groups marching around, Jewish graves defaced and bully boys attacking gay people, especially in Eastern Europe. Intolerance is looking like the flavour of the future. The sudden universality of this makes me wonder if it isn't a very organised effort and I wonder where it is coming from. Extreme Christian Evangelists are operating in Africa spreading Homophobia, Putin is famously Homophobic and there are some very Homophobic Islamic Evangelists too. However this is very linked to hatred of 'Gypsies' and Jews and seems more affiliated to the old fashioned Nazi far Right.

Here's some reports
RT...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIEc1f2r9LE

CNN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kqt2-EFX6R8

Fox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gU_Sa65II2k
 

RogerB

Crusader
This following clip concerning both the Russian and Putin mindsets I found very illuminating. It actually gave me a new understanding of what it was old George Knupffer said to me 50 years ago.

The actuality does appear that, apart from certain points of religious doctrine, the Orthodox system of principles is very different to the Jesuit cum Church of Rome set.

To me, the following says a lot.

Full article at the link in the header.

Six mistakes the West makes in dealing with Putin
21.10.2014


. . . snipped . . . .

Let's brush aside Lavrov's everlasting diplomatic comme il faut. In fact, the situation is much tougher. Samuel Phillips Huntington in his "Clash of Civilizations?" from 1993 wrote about the true purpose of the West. According to him, the West is determined to destroy Orthodoxy or subordinate Orthodoxy to Western principles. We can see how, for example, the British were doing it for centuries. They fought against Russia in the Crimean War (1852-1856), were opposed to Russia's stronger positions in the Balkans and Central Asia, they got Russia involved in World War I, were active participants in the Entente during the struggle against the young Soviet power, they developed plans to seize oil fields of the Caucasus after Hitler's possible victory, they were preparing for a preventive strike during the Cold War. Today, murderers and thieves, who escaped from Russia, find political asylum in the UK. British prime ministers have always been at the forefront of accusing Russia of "aggression" - David Cameron is no exception.

According to Huntington, it goes about the destruction of the Slavic culture and the Russian statehood, which is based on Orthodoxy. Even communism has Orthodox roots. Statehood came to Russia from Byzantium, and in this model, law will never be first priority, because for Orthodox believers, morality, friendship and justice is above law. Remember Russia's reunion with the Crimea, and what Putin said in Belgrade: "Russia does not sell friendship." The Byzantine model stipulates for the unification of equal peoples in one state with the help of love, rather than with the help of the Western melting pot model, which is governed by strict laws.

Given that the faith has been a reason for countless wars for centuries, the merger of two civilizations is impossible. This is not necessary due to the law of the dialectical development of the universe. Even Yeltsin, who sold everything he could to the West, warned: one should not expand NATO to the east, forgetting that Russia has a "nuclear briefcase." Putin has recently reiterated this idea by saying that the current conflict was a conflict between nuclear powers.

A second conclusion from the clash of civilizations is Orthodoxy, and, consequently, Russia has her own ideal picture of the world order. The imposition of another project is perceived as an attack on the foundations of statehood.

President Putin - is not a "mini-Gorbachev," as The New York Times wrote. He is not a huckster like Poroshenko, but a statesman, who will continue his efforts to make Russian, Orthodox model flourish. Putin's prime goal for the time being is to make sure that the West sees Russia as a full partner. Russia lost this reputation during the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. For the time being, the West does not understand that and hopes that sanctions will break Russia.

Huntington does not say that unity is possible in the struggle of opposites. This is nonetheless possible, but only when one has skills in finding compromises. What do the Anglo-Saxons need to understand?

First. All types of "Eastern partnerships" are impossible without consulting Russia. One needs to understand that Putin will not allow NATO bases to appear on the territory of Ukraine. He will adequately respond to extra military threats - the deployment of the missile defense system and rapid response forces.

Second. Do not teach us how to live. Putin will pursue protectionist policies to protect the Orthodox civilization, restrict the activities of Western NGOs that undermine the constitutional structure of Russia and morality of its people. Russia is not strong for its economy, but it is strong for something that the West can not understand - it is strong for its soul.

Third. The Russian president will behave accordingly to your behavior. If you consistently topple Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Yanukovych, it is reasonable to guess who is next on your list. Noteworthy, each candidate for toppling would at first be demonized in Western media. The same is happening with regard to Putin. Suffice it to mention numerous offensive comparisons to Hitler and "shirt-fronting" threats, because this is the language the "aggressor" understands (we're talking about Australian Prime Minister Abbott).

Fourth. If Obama puts Russia on the second place on the list of global threats, please expect an adequate reaction.

Fifth. Re-read memoirs of German, French and other conquerors of Russia. Sending you all sorts of "messages" is not Putin's way - he will act on the basis of national interests. "Do not expect that once taken advantage of Russia's weakness, you will receive dividends forever. Russians always come for their money. And when they come - they will not rely on the Jesuit agreement you signed, that supposedly justify your actions. They are not worth the paper it is written. Therefore, with the Russians you should use fair play or no play," said Otto von Bismarck.

Sixth. Your approach to world affairs has a destructing effect that everyone sees. There is a large group of countries behind Russia that have not yet decided to take Russia's side. If a moment comes, they will not doubt to do it.

Lyuba Lulko
Pravda.Ru
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
This following clip concerning both the Russian and Putin mindsets I found very illuminating. It actually gave me a new understanding of what it was old George Knupffer said to me 50 years ago.

The actuality does appear that, apart from certain points of religious doctrine, the Orthodox system of principles is very different to the Jesuit cum Church of Rome set.

To me, the following says a lot.

Full article at the link in the header.

Roger yes Russia is not London, or New York.

The Berlin wall fell, throughout Eastern Europe Communism died and 'freedom' resurfaced, the West rejoiced. Just as we rejoiced at the end of various Arab leaders. But the rejoicing was only because we failed to understand. Freedom to a Russian is the Freedom to be dictated to by Orthodox priests instead of non religious bureaucrats and the KGB. The same priests who backed pogroms against Russian Jews over a hundred years ago. Christianity in Eastern Europe is not the same as it is in America. You don't get gay churches there, you don't get the same personal choices, you don't have female priests or popes discussing birth control matters with parishioners and the clergy. There is no protestant tradition, you don't question you accept, you bow.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
I'll link the other useful posts with my comments . . . . only for those who are really interested, of course. The rest can wank-off. I already see the usual parade of attempts to fraudulently discredit what is likely to be made available to the world by this new endeavor.

For me, I like to analyse all the available and presented data. And I know there are some among us who do not go along with being spoon fed what to think but prefer to see the present time actuality rather than hang up in past prejudices or delusionary futures as presented by those who only dump one-liner opinions on these threads.

R

Am I likely to check out Sputnik? Yes, just as I peruse stories in RT.

Am I going to accept Sputnik and RT as being any more dedicated to truth than US media? No. But presumably they will point out some tidbits of data which can be verified, and which are being ignored by Western media.

And I will make my own decisions as to which story (if not both sides) is biased and/or delusional.
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
This first one by a Washington insider and former WSJ columnist . . . here blowing the whistle on American lies . . . .

Could you please give some examples of specific American lies, who said the lies, why they are lies, and the sources of your data confirming that they are lies?
 

RogerB

Crusader
Could you please give some examples of specific American lies, who said the lies, why they are lies, and the sources of your data confirming that they are lies?

You're so clever do the work yourself.

Also note, I did not write the article . . . ask the guy who wrote it.

As I've said, you are engaging in time wasting, and also a good example of what Mockingbird wrote of in his piece on how folks dissemble and try to deviate from what they do not want to be exposed on.

Or, maybe you should read and re-read some of the earlier propaganda you've dumped on us here and see how truthful it has been.

R
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
Could you please give some examples of specific American lies, who said the lies, why they are lies, and the sources of your data confirming that they are lies?

Stopping the spread of communism (Vietnam War) LBJ, et al...

Apology for lying to the American people is in Def Sec Robert McNamara's book: In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam


At the end of WWII, on Armistice day, Ho Chi Minh, who had fought against the French occupiers, and then WITH the allies against the Japanese with US weapons... rode through the middle of the capitol in an American Jeep with US Flags on it, playing the Star Spangled Banner on megaphones...

When the Allies gave Vietnam back to the French to occupy, it broke his heart and he could no longer get weapons or ammo from the US, so he went to the Chinese Communists... for weapons, to liberate his country from the French colonial explotation, and then in went the USA under color of lies..... cause there was a shit pot oil off the coasts....

If you want the truth follow the money Solon 500BC

========
The Attack by Israel on the USS LIBERTY 1967

This attack, sanctioned by LBJ, was to be blamed on Egypt to get us to fight along side Israel in the 67 War. The only reason it did not sink, were two COURAGEOUS IDF pilots refused direct orders to attack a US vessel, and drop thier torpedos, they were court marshaled... See 911... This story was first publicized in Liberty Lobby's Spotlight newspaper November 21, 1977 , (but they were just a bunch of kooks right?), which was itself torn apart with help from a $cientologist., Tom Marcellus http://www.lermanet.com/cisar/carto/

Sources, go do your own due diligence

"“The USS Liberty was set up by the U.S. government to be sunk by the Israeli military so that they could blame it on Egypt. After this attack, two American aircrafts were launched carrying nuclear-tipped missiles in order to bomb Cairo. That city was within three minutes of being obliterated. Without a doubt, it would have started WWIII.” - See more at: http://americanfreepress.net/?p=2309#sthash.N9xJdXuk.dpuf


Phil Tourney, on of the survivors said : "“If the truth ever came out,” Tourney began, “it would change history and how people felt about the Israeli state. If the mainstream media devoted an entire week of stories to the USS Liberty and exactly what happened, the American people would be up in arms, begging for blood. Even though I’ve been accused of being an anti-Semite for trying to tell the truth, everyone should remember one important point—USS Liberty crewmembers didn’t murder anyone. The state of Israel did. The truth will change history.”

Thirty-four crewmembers were killed during this Israeli assault, and 174 were wounded, most of them critically.
 
Last edited:

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
You're so clever do the work yourself.

Also note, I did not write the article . . . ask the guy who wrote it.

As I've said, you are engaging in time wasting, and also a good example of what Mockingbird wrote of in his piece on how folks dissemble and try to deviate from what they do not want to be exposed on.

Or, maybe you should read and re-read some of the earlier propaganda you've dumped on us here and see how truthful it has been.

R

The quote "This first one by a Washington insider and former WSJ columnist . . . here blowing the whistle on American lies . . . ." is from you in post #9, not the article writer.

You're the one who keeps harping on "American lies" and "Western propaganda" (in my recollection, as a generality without naming a particular news outlet or specific lie). Surely you can think of one specific instance off the top of your head?

OK, then, the next time you see one, perhaps you can comment on it?

In the meanwhile, your attitude comes across as a bit evasive and defensive.

PS: My thanks to Arnie Lerma for a specific incident. Yes, I agree that the USS Liberty was an atrocity against our sailors, and I do think there was some complicity on the part of LBJ.
 
Last edited:

Axiom142

Gold Meritorious Patron
Then there is an alarming growing of far right wing groups in EU, pretty much unreported in the UK.


That isn’t the case, there has been reporting of this – I know because I have seen it. Granted, other events have perhaps pushed this to the background, but certainly we have been aware of it.

I really cannot understand the reverence some here on ESMB seem to have for Putin. He is a charmless thug – actually reminds me a lot of Miscavige – and threatens the safety of pretty much the whole human population.

But excluding all the hearsay, just 2 things tell me that Russia is rapidly sliding towards an evil totalitarian state (again), and responsibility for much of this rests with Putin.

1. The boarding of the Arctic Sunrise and the arrest and imprisonment of 30 people, including journalists on trumped-up charges of piracy, simply because they dared to protest against Russian economic interests.

2. Treatment of gays. Under Putin, it is illegal for gay parents to even talk to their children about their sexuality. There is widespread discrimination against anyone even suspected of being gay, with gangs carrying out public beatings and recording them on video and all the while being ignored by the police and prosecutors.

Whenever Putin is mentioned, I recall with some amusement the photos he had taken by the ‘press’ of him demonstrating his virility and manliness by riding a horse, bare-chested:


o-PUTIN-HORSE-facebook.jpg



Well, I suppose he could have been riding without a saddle, which would have compounded the metaphor, but seriously, he couldn’t see how this would look?

Axiom142
 
Top