speak truth to power - go to jail [Archive] - Comic Book Resources Forums

cactusmaac

10-09-2006, 01:22 PM

It somewhat pisses me off to see the really disappointing Politkavskya murder and the ongoing lurching towards towards communist-era governance in Russia, roped in to make a cheap jab at Cheney.

That comments thread is hilarious though, especially for bringing up the William Kelly case in the midst of all "omg bush is a facist" posts.

It all crystallized for Kelly last July at the Sheraton Chicago, where Bill Clinton spoke to a conference of businessmen and labor leaders. Clinton, at that time still soaring above the swamp of venalities that is now swallowing his Administration, was hammering away at gridlock.
Advertisement

Suddenly, he was interrupted by a voice from the rear of the room. It was Bill Kelly. "How can you claim gridlock when the House and Senate are controlled by members of your own party?" asked Kelly. "You promised a middle-class tax cut. Now you are proposing the largest tax increase in American history. What you need to do is abide by your original campaign promise of a middle-class tax cut."

Kelly was quickly escorted out, with the President lecturing his back--and the cameras: "This is not your meeting, sir. Most people have better manners than to interrupt somebody giving a speech. I might say that's another thing wrong with this country. There's not enough civility in how we treat one another."

Three hours later, federal agents surrounded Kelly's family home, put him in handcuffs, and took him to the Metropolitan Correction Center (or the Black Hole of Chicago, as some call it), where he was interrogated and stripsearched, and, as he tells it, "spent the next 27 hours moving from [a] solitary cell to the federal lock-up with drug dealers and bank robbers in handcuffs and leg irons."

Kelly was then taken to court, charged under a catchall title of the U.S. Code with being in the same area of a building as the President of the United States, and released under a general agreement requiring that he not get arrested again for a similar crime--which means, apparently, avoiding all places where Presidents may be visiting.

Spike-X

10-09-2006, 01:28 PM

Cheny could have handled this in a much more diplomatic fashion. Perhaps he could have invited the gentlemen to discuss their differences in a more informal setting. Like, say...a hunting trip?

Justin Davis

10-09-2006, 01:30 PM

Jack Zodiac

10-09-2006, 01:31 PM

Mildly serious response: while it's nowhere near as disgusting as being murdered for your views of a government official, it's still disgusting. Between this and the slew of other freedoms being kicked in the balls by the Bush administration, we're a few shades shy of 1984.

Completely joking response: that guy's lucky Cheney didn't just haul off and shoot him in the face.

Paul McEnery

10-09-2006, 01:33 PM

Ray R.

10-09-2006, 01:57 PM

I wonder how much of this is the evildoing of the administration or the secret service under this administration. Sometimes, especially in the first instance, I get the feeling that it's more along the lines of the secret service abusing their power with the administration not admonishing them for it (which is obviously not good) than the administration issuing demands that the secret service act in such a way.

Bingo.

And I know this neither here nor there, but if there are any Secret Service comic book readers who might stop by the board, I'd like to say the following:

Perhaps it's considered a point of national security for you to run huge fifteen car motorcades for Dick Cheney to go get a fucking haircut or a teeth cleaning, thereby causing one and two hour delays for innocent commuters who actually need to get to work to earn the paycheck to pay the taxes that pay your salaries, but I'm thinking you probably don't need to shut down every major thoroughfare in Washington, D.C., to get the job done efficiently and safely. We realize that we are just insects in your way, and try to get over to side quickly and safely, but don't let that stop you from blaring sirens and yelling through voice speakers to "MOVE." Doesn't cause us to resent you or the giant flaming asshole sitting in the vice-presidential limosine either, no matter what party is in power.

All the best!

Ray

Michael P

10-09-2006, 02:02 PM

I wonder how much of this is the evildoing of the administration or the secret service under this administration. Sometimes, especially in the first instance, I get the feeling that it's more along the lines of the secret service abusing their power with the administration not admonishing them for it (which is obviously not good) than the administration issuing demands that the secret service act in such a way.
Yeah, my instincts run that way, too. I think the Kelly incident just shows that the Secret Service in general prefers to err on the side of gross abuse of civil liberties. In that, they're like pretty much every other Federal security agency.

Part of it is probably the painting of a Presidential assassination as the worst possible thing that could happen to the country. While it's certainly a bad thing, I think the last few years have taught us that there are plenty worse. So we could all do to lighten up with our assassinationophobia.

Honestly, if people would just get over Kennedy already, that'd probably do the trick.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 02:36 PM

Okay, first and foremost... it wan't the government that shot her.

Second, every Russian alive is glad she got shot.

I am glad she got shot, every friend and relative I have are glad she got shot.

She deserved it, for supporting Chechen terrorism, for supporting Georgian perpetrated Genocides, for cheering over tortured and mutilated Russian soldiers.

It's good that she is dead, very good. I hope the bitch suffered before she died. I wish she'd been tortured as well, to make it more ironic.

That said... who did it.

Not the Russian government, it would be stupid for them to completely destroy their public image after the victory in Georgia. It doesen't make sense. Putin isn't stupid, nor... in any Russian's opinion anyway, is he a tyrat.

My guess, it was the current Chechen prezident Kadyrov or some ultra-nationalist group that hired the kill. She was heavily critisizing Kadyrov's government, and take it from a caucasian, we don't take that kind of shit lightly.

And all the guesses about FSB and the suppression of "free speech in Russia", well... I can just advise everyone who has never been to Russia to kindly shut their yaps. During the western-backed "democratic" prezident Yeltsin, journalists were getting shot BY the government in the open and by the packs, and the west didn't say a word. Why? Simple, Yeltsin was a puppet.

The only reason this is causing such a stir now is because the west is dismayed by a resurgent, finally prospering Russia and can't wait to shit all over it for their own gains.

Paul McEnery

10-09-2006, 02:52 PM

Gumbo Maximillian

10-09-2006, 02:59 PM

Honestly; never head of reporters getting shot before, thats pretty distressing, especially in a supposed "democracy".

On the flip side; I personally didn't know Russian was starting to get started up again economically and doubt most other americans were aware of that either.

Especially since were pretty much the subjects of today are terrorism and immigration, that and Bush being a horrible president.

Though here's a question, if Russia is as corrupt as you say it is, are these people terrorists or freedom fighters?

Okay, first and foremost... it wan't the government that shot her.

Second, every Russian alive is glad she got shot.

I am glad she got shot, every friend and relative I have are glad she got shot.

She deserved it, for supporting Chechen terrorism, for supporting Georgian perpetrated Genocides, for cheering over tortured and mutilated Russian soldiers.

It's good that she is dead, very good. I hope the bitch suffered before she died. I wish she'd been tortured as well, to make it more ironic.

That said... who did it.

Not the Russian government, it would be stupid for them to completely destroy their public image after the victory in Georgia. It doesen't make sense. Putin isn't stupid, nor... in any Russian's opinion anyway, is he a tyrat.

My guess, it was the current Chechen prezident Kadyrov or some ultra-nationalist group that hired the kill. She was heavily critisizing Kadyrov's government, and take it from a caucasian, we don't take that kind of shit lightly.

And all the guesses about FSB and the suppression of "free speech in Russia", well... I can just advise everyone who has never been to Russia to kindly shut their yaps. During the western-backed "democratic" prezident Yeltsin, journalists were getting shot BY the government in the open and by the packs, and the west didn't say a word. Why? Simple, Yeltsin was a puppet.

The only reason this is causing such a stir now is because the west is dismayed by a resurgent, finally prospering Russia and can't wait to shit all over it for their own gains.

moebius

10-09-2006, 03:06 PM

Subotai

10-09-2006, 03:08 PM

moebius

10-09-2006, 03:13 PM

On the flip side; I personally didn't know Russian was starting to get started up again economically and doubt most other americans were aware of that either.

[Raises Hand] I knew! I knew! Russia's been on an economic upswing for the past five years or so. Though I admit I don't know why.

I also know about the frequent killing of journalists. The editor for the Russian edition of Forbes was assassinated outside of his office in October 2004, after running articles criticizing the Russian Secretary of State.

Also, earlier this year the political scientist most closely observing the surging Russian neo-Nazi was assassinated by a shotgun blast when answering his door.

Political scientists haven't been calling it "Weimar Russia" for the last 10 years for nothing...

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:18 PM

She cheered over a Russian seviceman who had a family watching when he was tortured and decapitated by the Chechens.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 03:18 PM

It somewhat pisses me off to see the really disappointing Politkavskya murder and the ongoing lurching towards towards communist-era governance in Russia, roped in to make a cheap jab at Cheney.

What the hell are you talking about? There's no cheap jab. Paul said nothing more than what literally happened.

Why are you defensive about an old bastard?

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:26 PM

[Raises Hand] I knew! I knew! Russia's been on an economic upswing for the past five years or so. Though I admit I don't know why.

We finally got a prezident that's not a western-puppet and who leads an economy that's actually made to succeed. My grandparents in Russia are overjoyed that their pensions are finally paid regularly.

I also know about the frequent killing of journalists. The editor for the Russian edition of Forbes was assassinated outside of his office in October 2004, after running articles criticizing the Russian Secretary of State.

THAT was probably government work. I admit.

Also, earlier this year the political scientist most closely observing the surging Russian neo-Nazi was assassinated by a shotgun blast when answering his door.

Hmmm... could it have been that the neo-nazi skinheadas killed him? Shotgun at door sounds like them.

Actually, I'll just out right say it, it was them. As an asiatic representative of a caucasian minority, I have all the right and reason for hating skinheads.

Political scientists haven't been calling it "Weimar Russia" for the last 10 years for nothing...

And the Russians call it "Finally, we got a country we can live in, as opposed to the horror of the nineties." "Rodina" "Home" "Our country"

Those scientists... would they happen to be western based??

Oh, of course. Why on Earth would they say anything good about Russia, especially after all the attempt to discredit and humiliate it.

I am a Russian, I lived there during the nineties and have been back several times since for periods of moths during summers, and I can say this. This is the nicest it has ever been in my twenty year lifetime. Things are finally getting built, economy is rising, people are happy, salaries are opaid, pensions are paid, it's okay to be patriotic again and we've finally got a middle class.

What these "scientists" have to say means shit to me when I am the native and patriot of the country they're clueless, and have always been clueless about.

cactusmaac

10-09-2006, 03:28 PM

The only reason this is causing such a stir now is because the west is dismayed by a resurgent, finally prospering Russia and can't wait to shit all over it for their own gains.

Resurgent? Finally prospering?

The only reason for Russia's current enhanced prosperity is the recent uptick in oil prices.

Still if attitudes like yours are prevalent, I wouldn't hold out hope for the country emerging from political gangsterism any time soon.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:29 PM

http://www.gost-r.info/obrazy/russia-flag.gif

......................

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 03:34 PM

What these "scientists" have to say means shit to me when I am the native and patriot of the country they're clueless, and have always been clueless about.

That's a pretty ridiculous and anti-intellectual standpoint to take, and lines you up more with the current American administration than I bet you'd like.

king mob

10-09-2006, 03:36 PM

I call it free trade.

I call it blackmail.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:36 PM

That's a pretty ridiculous and anti-intellectual standpoint to take, and lines you up more with the current American administration than I bet you'd like.

I strongly dislike the current US administration.

And please tell me, who should I listen to, some west-paid and nbiased social mouthpieces about how bad my country is, or my own eyes that tell me that there is definite improvement in Russia nd my relatives living there who say the same thing?

Paul McEnery

10-09-2006, 03:38 PM

Hmm. I thought there was a separate thread on this, but if there is, I'm sure it'll merge.

So: every Russian hated her? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1890857,00.html)

A crowd of protesters gathered in central Moscow yesterday to express their anger at the assassination of the crusading journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who at the weekend became the 13th Russian journalist to be killed in a contract-style killing since President Vladimir Putin came to power in 2000.
Politkovskaya, 48, had today been due to publish an article on torture and kidnappings by pro-Moscow forces in the restless southern republic of Chechnya, her colleagues said.

...

Politkovskaya, who won international acclaim for exposing the brutality of Russian forces in Chechnya, was shot dead in the lift of her apartment block in Moscow on Saturday. Police were last night hunting a man in a white baseball cap who was filmed by a CCTV camera entering the building a few moments before she was shot three times in the chest and once in the head.

The killing immediately threw suspicion on the security services and the pro-Moscow Chechen forces that control Chechnya. "You just have to look at the subjects of her latest work and there's your list of chief suspects," said Viktor Shenderovich, a well-known radio and television commentator, who joined the protest by several hundred people on Pushkin Square. In a reference to the KGB's successor, the federal security service FSB, Mr Shenderovich said: "The culprits will never be found, because the people who will be investigating this murder walk down the same corridors as those who ordered it."

Protesters carried placards reading "The Kremlin killed freedom of speech", and "Anna, great daughter of Russia".

Flyura Arslanova, a pensioner clutching a photograph of Politkovskaya and dabbing her eyes with a handkerchief, said: "It's a tragedy. She was killed for being honest."

Eduard Limonov, a radical opposition figure, said: "It is Putin who has created this society of hate where journalists are murdered and other nationalities become the victim of Russian race supremacy."

king mob

10-09-2006, 03:39 PM

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:39 PM

You've got a piss poor argument style. Why don't you try having a discussion, instead of throwing out childish attacks?

Pkay. so, based on what are you making your judgements about the current state of Russia?

Have you ever been to Russia?

Do you have relatives in Russia?

What are your sources for information?

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:40 PM

Do you really think being the second largest arms dealer on the planet is really something to be proud of?

First actually, we beat the US by 1.2 billion in 2005. 2006 is proving even better.

And what's wrong with it? Every other country is doing it, and considering the west forced the collapse on us in the nineties through Yeltsin, I count it as only fair.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 03:42 PM

I strongly dislike the current US administration.

And please tell me, who should I listen to, some west-paid and nbiased social mouthpieces about how bad my country is, or my own eyes that tell me that there is definite improvement in Russia nd my relatives living there who say the same thing?

You're creating a false dichotomy. You can't just say that all the political scientists are biased mouthpieces and think that makes it true. I seriously doubt that every single political scientist from outside of Russia is making up stories to discount the place.

And you also need to accept that there is a world outside of your perspective, and that there may be things that you are not aware of. While things might look one way from your point of view and in your immediate sphere of influence, that doesn't speak to the whole country, or even everybody that you know.

And it is possible to be well-informed and have a good understanding of a nation's politics and political state without living there.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:43 PM

Hmm. I thought there was a separate thread on this, but if there is, I'm sure it'll merge.

So: every Russian hated her? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1890857,00.html)

Uh huh, a crowd in a ciuntry of 143 million people.

During Beslan, there were those who cheered for the Chechens as well.

So how about I rephrase that. the overwhelming majority hated her.

That said, I already gave the reasons why it couldn't reasonably be the FSB that killed her, so the point is moot.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 03:43 PM

Pkay. so, based on what are you making your judgements about the current state of Russia?

Please show me where I've made any judgements about the current state of Russia.

I defy you.

king mob

10-09-2006, 03:45 PM

WHAT???

They are being asked to pay the freakin MARKET PRICE!

How on Earth is that blackmail.

The Soviet Union is gone, they declined the partnership, so they have to pay it, by INTERNATIONAL LAW!!!!

Is asking somebody to follow the law blackmail now?

Wow, I sometimes just can't believe western hipocricy.

Who decides the market price, who turns the supply on and off to prove a point, how many Russian millionaires (i'm looking at the likes of Ambravonich) have made their millions by (at best) corruption?

It isn't 'hipocricy', it's questioning the economic 'miracle' that seems to be built on corruption and lies.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:46 PM

You're creating a false dichotomy. You can't just say that all the political scientists are biased mouthpieces and think that makes it true. I seriously doubt that every single political scientist from outside of Russia is making up stories to discount the place.

Considering the west's general attitude towards Russia, starting with the nineties economic advise and ending wi the pathetic orange revolutions, It'd have to be something pretty serious to convince me otherwise.

also need to accept that there is a world outside of your perspective, and that there may be things that you are not aware of. While things might look one way from your point of view and in your immediate sphere of influence, that doesn't speak to the whole country, or even everybody that you know.

It's not just my perspective, or even that of the people I've talked to. Go to any Russian forum, or diaspora in general, you'll hear theame thing. We can't all be wrong.

And it is possible to be well-informed and have a good understanding of a nation's politics and political state without living there.

I'll argue this. To truly know a p[lace, you at least have to go there once, talk to its people.

Jack Zodiac

10-09-2006, 03:46 PM

Wow, I sometimes just can't believe western hipocricy.

Western hypocrisy, eh? You mean like... villifying anyone dealing with Chechnyan rebels, while starting relations with Hamas?

Everyone's a hypocrite. It doesn't matter what hemisphere you're in. Every government talks and acts out of its own ass, including Russia.

king mob

10-09-2006, 03:47 PM

First actually, we beat the US by 1.2 billion in 2005. 2006 is proving even better.

And what's wrong with it? Every other country is doing it, and considering the west forced the collapse on us in the nineties through Yeltsin, I count it as only fair.

So supplying the likes of East Timor is something to be proud of? Because everyone else is doing it is a bollocks reason to do it.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:48 PM

Western hypocrisy, eh? You mean like... villifying anyone dealing with Chechnyan rebels, while starting relations with Hamas? [quote]

Russia hasn't assisted the Hamas in any way. Aside from sending engineers to help rebuild the destroyed parts of Lebanon post war.

[quote]Everyone's a hypocrite. It doesn't matter what hemisphere you're in. Every government talks and acts out of its own ass, including Russia.

Now this, I agree with, but the west, US in particular, seems particularly keen on it lately.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 03:53 PM

So supplying the likes of East Timor is something to be proud of? Because everyone else is doing it is a bollocks reason to do it.

I openly admit it's not, but when there's a way to make money......

Think about it this way. Because of the western helped collapse, Putin's Russia was in dire crisis after 1998. So what's a government to do? It's first job is to look out for it's own and its people's interests. And technically, selling weapons is perfectly legal.

So... sell weapons and make money to fix the military andindustrial base, or remain miserable?

It's not something to be proud of, I hate it too, but no government in the world could, or would've done differently.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 03:58 PM

Considering the west's general attitude towards Russia, starting with the nineties economic advise and ending wi the pathetic orange revolutions, It'd have to be something pretty serious to convince me otherwise.

You can't say that a "general attitude" is reflective of every single political scientist. Doesn't work. What do you mean it would have to be something pretty serious to convince you that not every political scientist is anti-russian? A report by them demonstrating as much wouldn't be enough?

It's not just my perspective, or even that of the people I've talked to. Go to any Russian forum, or diaspora in general, you'll hear theame thing. We can't all be wrong.

A huge amount of you could. Look at how many people support and voted for George W. Bush.

I'll argue this. To truly know a p[lace, you at least have to go there once, talk to its people.

Except you haven't argued it, because that doesn't contradict what I said. I said you don't have to live there to be able to speak to the national politics.

Paul McEnery

10-09-2006, 04:29 PM

Um, well, there's also the weapons market, industrial progress, a finelly occuring auto industry that's alowly growing, Russia building it's own silicone valley, the opening up of businesse, having paid off our national debt... butr I guess you didn't know about that huh?

Sure, oil has helped great, so what, money makes money. The surplus gotten by oil is put to developing other fields of economy.

And as for prospering, when was the last time you went to Russia? Never.. then shut the hell up.

As for my attitude being prevalent... well, duh. What am I excpected to do? Shit on my country? For what?

And gangsterism????? Oh I'm sorry, that must be american for "Asking now western countries for paying the normal price for gas as opposed to the dirt cheap sales prices from the soviet days".

I call it free trade.
Seems to me that both can be true.

And actually, Russia's economic resurgence depended on rejecting free trade (i.e. IMF conditions) and resorting to a more protectionist approach. And sure, by all means use oil to re-invest in infrastructure. I don't know enough to know if the economy is being built on a bubble, though. Let's hope not.

But gangsterism and government shooting of critical journalists (thirteen, so far); sadly, that's also part of the picture.

Brian Cronin

10-09-2006, 04:35 PM

As everybody's pal, the Watcher, says, "This is a forum where posters discuss topics of interest," and that includes topics that some might prefer them not to talk about.

It may be annoying to you, but it is allowed. The avenue open to all is to civilly disagree with their statements.

There has been a lot of civil discussion here, and there has been some that was not. Stick to the former, do not use the latter.

-Brian

Deskad

10-09-2006, 04:45 PM

You can't say that a "general attitude" is reflective of every single political scientist. Doesn't work. What do you mean it would have to be something pretty serious to convince you that not every political scientist is anti-russian? A report by them demonstrating as much wouldn't be enough?[quote]

Never said any, just the vast majority of the western backed ones. I have not seen evidence to the contrary.

[quote]A huge amount of you could. Look at how many people support and voted for George W. Bush.

I agree that we could be wrong. In 2000, I would've voted for Bush because I was pissed at anyone associated with Clinton for the Kosovo debacle.

However, until evidence to the contrary presents itself, and so far I have only seen evidence to support my positive outlook of current Russian government, I will keep believing what I believe.

Except you haven't argued it, because that doesn't contradict what I said. I said you don't have to live there to be able to speak to the national politics.

I didn't say you have to live there, I said you'd at least have to go there and talk to the people. I currently live in Canada, but as I travel to Russia extensively and for long periods of time, I have justification for my claims.

My argument was that since you do not have that much experience with a country, then you really don't have a say on how things are there unless you go and see for yourself as to what the place is like, at least as a casual visitor/tourist.

That is alll I was saying.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:09 PM

[Raises Hand] I knew! I knew! Russia's been on an economic upswing for the past five years or so. Though I admit I don't know why.

High oil prices and high commodity prices in general.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 05:12 PM

Never said any, just the vast majority of the western backed ones. I have not seen evidence to the contrary.

Actually, you didn't say that, either. You made a broad, sweeping statement about political scientists. You added the qualifier in later.

However, until evidence to the contrary presents itself, and so far I have only seen evidence to support my positive outlook of current Russian government, I will keep believing what I believe.

Well, that's not true. You have seen evidence pointing to the opposite, you just choose to disbelieve it. You said so yourself.

My argument was that since you do not have that much experience with a country, then you really don't have a say on how things are there unless you go and see for yourself as to what the place is like, at least as a casual visitor/tourist.

See, that's what I disagree with. Just being someplace doesn't give you an understanding of it. Hell, I spent a little time in Italy last year, but I'm entirely unqualified to speak on their national affairs. Even when it comes to what's happening in other states of the union, having visited the place isn't usually enough to give an informative view of what's going on. You have to study and learn and talk to people, which can all be done online nowadays, so you can actually learn more about a place than someone who might've been there.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:14 PM

Hmm. I thought there was a separate thread on this, but if there is, I'm sure it'll merge.

So: every Russian hated her? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1890857,00.html)

Yes, all the real patriotic Russians hated her - you can't count the degenerate unpatriotic scum at her funeral as real Russians.

They'll get their's, don't worry.

StoneGold

10-09-2006, 05:15 PM

She cheered over a Russian seviceman who had a family watching when he was tortured and decapitated by the Chechens.
And you cheering her death makes you better than her!

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:18 PM

Actually, you didn't say that, either. You made a broad, sweeping statement about political scientists. You added the qualifier in later.

Okay.......

Well, that's not true. You have seen evidence pointing to the opposite, you just choose to disbelieve it. You said so yourself.

What evidence? Was it a post, an article? So far all I had to rebut me was people's opinion.

See, that's what I disagree with. Just being someplace doesn't give you an understanding of it. Hell, I spent a little time in Italy last year, but I'm entirely unqualified to speak on their national affairs. Even when it comes to what's happening in other states of the union, having visited the place isn't usually enough to give an informative view of what's going on. You have to study and learn and talk to people, which can all be done online nowadays, so you can actually learn more about a place than someone who might've been there.

You're being repetitive... of me. Didn't I say that you have to talk to people as well?

Maybe I should rephrase myself.

YES, a little visit without doing anything more than a casual glance certainly can't form an opinion.

You have to talk to people, take a serious look around, then make judgements.

We're basically saying the same thing. There is no argument.

My only point is, that you actually have to have been somewhere and talked to people who live there OR/AND lived there yorself to make a judgement.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:18 PM

Pkay. so, based on what are you making your judgements about the current state of Russia?

Have you ever been to Russia?

Do you have relatives in Russia?

What are your sources for information?

Have you ever been to Chechnya?

Because you seem to have some fairly decided opinions about it.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 05:21 PM

You're being repetitive... of me. Didn't I say that you have to talk to people as well?

Maybe I should rephrase myself.

YES, a little visit without doing anything more than a casual glance certainly can't form an opinion.

You have to talk to people, take a serious look around, then make judgements.

We're basically saying the same thing. There is no argument.

My only point is, that you actually have to have been somewhere and talked to people who live there OR/AND lived there yorself to make a judgement.

The point where we differ is that I'm saying that you can talk to people, and learn all about someplace without having ever been there.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:22 PM

And you cheering her death makes you better than her!

Maybe not.... However, what exactly am I supposed to be doing? Am I supposed to feel sorry for her?

She cheered the death of my people. I don't feel sorry for her. My only regret is she got off easy.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:23 PM

The point where we differ is that I'm saying that you can talk to people, and learn all about someplace without having ever been there.

Okay, maybe. I'll bend a little and agree.

Next point, how many Russians have you talked to?

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:23 PM

So supplying the likes of East Timor is something to be proud of? Because everyone else is doing it is a bollocks reason to do it.

Well, see, Russia is owed something by the west (according to thiz reasoning) so it's only fair that the children of countries like Somalia and Ivory Coast foot the bill.

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 05:23 PM

Maybe not.... However, what exactly am I supposed to be doing?

Not sinking to her level?

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 05:25 PM

Okay, maybe. I'll bend a little and agree.

Next point, how many Russians have you talked to?

A few. I also know a guy from high school who spent some time in Russia a year or so ago. And for whatever it's worth, I have Russian ancestry.

But none of that really matters, because I wasn't the one making any remarks about the current state of Russia. I'm still defying you.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:26 PM

Have you ever been to Chechnya?[quote]

No, but I was raised a walking distance away from it. Had I been there, I would've been killed.

[quote]Because you seem to have some fairly decided opinions about it.

I come from an area right next to it, and I know about Chechen history and have talked to Chechens.

Also, I had to witness 350 children from my country die because of Chechens.

I feel that I have some right of opinion as to how and what is happening in that part of the world.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:26 PM

What evidence? Was it a post, an article? So far all I had to rebut me was people's opinion.

This is a valid argument.

However it also applies to the numerous unsupported assertions you've made in this thread.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:27 PM

Maybe not.... However, what exactly am I supposed to be doing? Am I supposed to feel sorry for her?

She cheered the death of my people. I don't feel sorry for her. My only regret is she got off easy.

Since you just asked another poster to provide evidence for their views why don't you start by documenting this - preferably from an English language source.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:28 PM

A few. I also know a guy from high school who spent some time in Russia a year or so ago. And for whatever it's worth, I have Russian ancestry.

And pray tell, what have they said, and have they been to Russia in the last 6 years? Also, were thy Russian or from another near-Russian post Soviet republic?

But none of that really matters, because I wasn't the one making any remarks about the current state of Russia.

Alright, so what's your view? Otherwise I'm arguing against nothing here.

I'm still defying you.

good for you.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:29 PM

Since you just asked another poster to provide evidence for their views why don't you start by documenting this - preferably from an English language source.

Evidence for what?

The state of Russia?

Her being disliked?

The reason for the Chechen war?

Dan Apodaca

10-09-2006, 05:30 PM

Otherwise I'm arguing against nothing here.

Exactly.

good for you.

Yep. And bad for you.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:30 PM

This is a valid argument.

However it also applies to the numerous unsupported assertions you've made in this thread.

What assertions?

Samurai

10-09-2006, 05:31 PM

There was a mutual arms race between the US and USSR. The US won by outspending the Soviets, who literally broke the country trying to keep up. It's a shame it happened, but it's much better than the 2 countries fighting it out militarily.

After the collapse, the transfer of industries to the Oligarchs was, IMO, a terrible move that greatly hindered the recovery and concentrated wealth and power into the hands of a very few friends of the former Communist regime instead of to all the people. From what I've heard, Russia is finally getting back on it's own 2 feet again, and many more of the people are doing better finally.

I think the US should have done more to help Russia transition to a market economy, but I'm not sure if it would have worked. The Russians are a very proud people, for one thing. And they were also still very suspicious of the US back then, after so many decades as enemies/rivals. They may not have accepted too much more help.

I would hope that eventually the animosities of the past are left completely behind us, and a new era of friendship and cooperation begins.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:31 PM

Exactly.

Yep. And bad for you.

If you don't have a point to make, stop posting.

My argument initially was against the belief that Russia is somehow silencing freedom of speech, and that the FSB shot the reporter.

Unless you contradict those two, your posting makes no sense to me.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:33 PM

I would hope that eventually the animosities of the past are left completely behind us, and a new era of friendship and cooperation begins.

There is almost nothing I hope for more than that, but in the meantime, the US seems to be doing everything to worsen the situation.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:36 PM

What assertions?

For example, your repeated claims that Yeltsin was an American puppet who deliberately sabotaged the Russian economy; youe claims that Politkovskaya "cheered the death" of russian servicemen; your claim that the overwhelming majority of Russians agree with you; your claim that western countries (as opposed to Ukraine) weren't paying market price for Russian gas; your claim that Russian pensioners are finally being paid on tiem when within the last week I've seen media reports about pensioners complaining that theyt STILL aren't being paid; your claim that "every country" exports arms when in fact abotu 90% of the arms trade is controlled by about five countries and Russia is one of a small number of countries not to sign the treaty bannign small arms sales to developing countries.

Want me to go on?

Samurai

10-09-2006, 05:37 PM

There is almost nothing I hope for more than that, but in the meantime, the US seems to be doing everything to worsen the situation.
I don't know about that. Putin and Bush seem to get along fairly well, and many Americans see Beslan as Russia's big wake-up call to Islamic terrorism the same way 9/11 was for the US, 7/7 for England, and Bali for Australia. I think we have a common enemy, as some Chechen groups have contact with international terrorist groups.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:39 PM

I don't know about that. Putin and Bush seem to get along fairly well, and many Americans see Beslan as Russia's big wake-up call to Islamic terrorism the same way 9/11 was for the US, 7/7 for England, and Bali for Australia. I think we have a common enemy, as some Chechen groups have contact with international terrorist groups.

Orange revolutions.

Georgian conflict.

Backing out of nuclear agreements and claiming to be able to destroy Russia in a single blow.

Nato bases near Russian borders.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:39 PM

Evidence for what?

The state of Russia?

Her being disliked?

The reason for the Chechen war?

You claimed that she cheered as Russian soldiers were tortured to death.

Prove it.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:48 PM

For example, your repeated claims that Yeltsin was an American puppet who deliberately sabotaged the Russian economy;[quote]

Sooooo, the shelling of the Russian white House and suppression of media wasn't evidence enough?

[quote] youe claims that Politkovskaya "cheered the death" of russian servicemen;

Read her articles.

your claim that the overwhelming majority of Russians agree with you;

Um, that's not something that generally needs to be proven. Go to any Russian forum.

your claim that western countries (as opposed to Ukraine) weren't paying market price for Russian gas;

http://www.exile.ru/2005-December-28/gas_attack_the_ukraine_gives_itself_indigestionby. html

a good article about the whole thing.

your claim that Russian pensioners are finally being paid on tiem when within the last week I've seen media reports about pensioners complaining that theyt STILL aren't being paid;

I admit, some might still not be, I don't know every Russian pensioner personally...DUH! My 4 grandparents however, are, and say that their friends are as well, and most of the older people in Moscow they know are happy.

your claim that "every country" exports arms when in fact abotu 90% of the arms trade is controlled by about five countries and Russia is one of a small number of countries not to sign the treaty bannign small arms sales to developing countries.

My quote "every other country is doing it" wasn't meant to be taken literally, it was more like a sweeping statement.

Basically, yes, Russia is selling weapons to anybody, so what. The people in Russia aren't unhappy about this.

Want me to go on?

Oh please, do. So far you haven't accomplished anything.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:49 PM

You claimed that she cheered as Russian soldiers were tortured to death.

Prove it.

Read her articles.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:51 PM

Read her articles.

I'm not making the claim.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:53 PM

I'm not making the claim.

On the same note, you have no evidence to the contrary either.

Honestly, I can't find any of her junk now[her name mostly brought up the killing], but give me some time.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:56 PM

[QUOTE=Iangould]For example, your repeated claims that Yeltsin was an American puppet who deliberately sabotaged the Russian economy;[quote]

Sooooo, the shelling of the Russian white House and suppression of media wasn't evidence enough?

Read her articles.

Um, that's not something that generally needs to be proven. Go to any Russian forum.

http://www.exile.ru/2005-December-28/gas_attack_the_ukraine_gives_itself_indigestionby. html

a good article about the whole thing.

I admit, some might still not be, I don't know every Russian pensioner personally...DUH! My 4 grandparents however, are, and say that their friends are as well, and most of the older people in Moscow they know are happy.

My quote "every other country is doing it" wasn't meant to be taken literally, it was more like a sweeping statement.

Basically, yes, Russia is selling weapons to anybody, so what. The people in Russia aren't unhappy about this.

Oh please, do. So far you haven't accomplished anything.

"Is too" doesn't contitute proof.

The only source you actually cite, doesn't support the claim you made.

From your source: "The current price of Russian gas to Western Europe is about $230 per 1000 cubic meters. This is well below the price from Europe's other sources - the continental deposits, the Norwegian gas from the North Sea, or limited supplies from the North Africa."

But well above the international market spot price. Europeans pay a premium above the market price for security of supply. They pay a lower premium to Russia because Russia has proven to be an unreliable supplier.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:57 PM

Michael P

10-09-2006, 05:57 PM

Maybe not.... However, what exactly am I supposed to be doing? Am I supposed to feel sorry for her?
Yes, you are. It's called empathy.

I understand that she said and did some things you didn't like. I personally find those acts reprehensible as well. But that doesn't mean I don't also acknowledge that her death was brutal, twisted murder, and that's never a good thing.

Barbara Olsen died in the plane crash that hit the Pentagon on 9/11. For about six months previous, she'd been on a slander tour of the talk shows, running Gary Condit's name through the mud and basically trying and convicting him of Chandra Levy's murder without evidence (including, for the large part of that scandal, a body) nightly on Larry King. Prior to that, she was part of the crack Hillary Clinton character assassination squad, and tried and convicted her in print of pretty much everything short of kidnapping the Lindbergh baby and shooting J.R. Ewing. My personal and professional opinion of the woman was that she was a latter-day G. Gordon Liddy, doing to the lives and reputations of her masters' political enemies what he did to Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office.

Nonetheless, I felt no differently about her death than the deaths of the other 2,999 victims of the attacks. I felt sorry for her, and for her family (including her widower, Ted Olsen, another person I'm disinclined to have a high opinion of). Nobody should have to die so some asshole can make a political point. Or any other kind, for that matter.

You obviously don't think so much of this woman. So, I ask, is she really worth debasing yourself like this?

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:58 PM

On the same note, you have no evidence to the contrary either.

Honestly, I can't find any of her junk now[her name mostly brought up the killing], but give me some time.

If I claim Vladimir Putin eats babies,your inability to find articles to the contrary isn't proof of my claim.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:58 PM

The only source you actually cite, doesn't support the claim you made.

From your source: "The current price of Russian gas to Western Europe is about $230 per 1000 cubic meters. This is well below the price from Europe's other sources - the continental deposits, the Norwegian gas from the North Sea, or limited supplies from the North Africa."

But well above the international market spot price. Europeans pay a premium above the market price for security of supply. They pay a lower premium to Russia because Russia has proven to be an unreliable supplier.

Read the rest of the article.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 05:59 PM

The current price of Russian gas to Western Europe is about $230 per 1000 cubic meters. This is well below the price from Europe's other sources - the continental deposits, the Norwegian gas from the North Sea, or limited supplies from the North Africa. But it is well above the price of Russian gas provided to the post-Soviet space, even to the least friendly regimes. Until now the price of Russian gas to these countries was about $50 per 1000 cubic meters - give or take a dozen bucks. The main reason was that these countries on the periphery of the former USSR had critical pieces of the oil and gas export infrastructure, built back in Soviet times - pipelines, compressor stations, seaport terminals. Russia has only recently begun to build alternative pipelines through neutral or friendlier territories, and to increase export prices to the ex-USSR countries.

like this part in particular.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 05:59 PM

Iangould.. just what exactly are you trying to prove.

I stated my points, what are yours?

I stated that the FSB didn't kill her, that the Kremlin isn't stifling Russia's free speech, that Russia got better under Putin, that the Yeltsin government was horrible.

What is your point?

My points are:

a. killing is bad

b. you shouldn't slander the dead

c. if you are going to demand that other people prove their statements you should be prepared to prove yours.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 06:01 PM

Yes, you are. It's called empathy.

Uh huh, sorry, I don't practice it.

Glad she died, sorry she didn't suffer more.

Incidentaly, she also spoke against Ossetian separatism, and that makes me even more glad she's dead.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 06:02 PM

My points are:

a. killing is bad

Would you still say that if the person killed was Osama Bin Laden?

b. you shouldn't slander the dead

same as above.

c. if you are going to demand that other people prove their statements you should be prepared to prove yours.

I did.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 06:04 PM

Read the rest of the article.

I did, it deals with the lower price for gas sold to ex-soviet states - which has nothing to do with your claim that the western Europeans were ripping Russia off with below-market prices.

It also omits mention of the fact that Russia wants "market prices" for its gas but wants to continue paying Soviet-era access prices for Ukraine's pipelines.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 06:05 PM

Anyways, arguing here isn't accomplishing crap... so why bother.

My last point.

I am really glad the bitch is dead. I hope Russia gets richer and stronger, and I hope Ossetia finally gains its freedom.

End of rant, end of argument.

Michael P

10-09-2006, 06:06 PM

Uh huh, sorry, I don't practice it.
Unfortunate.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 06:06 PM

I did.

No, you didn't.

Repeating a claim is not the same as proving it. Neither is "well the proof is out there somewhere."

Nor are assertions that unnamed, foreign-language forums are somehow representative of Russian popular opinion.

I can show you English language forums full of people who think Bush is doing a fantastic job.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 06:07 PM

I did, it deals with the lower price for gas sold to ex-soviet states - which has nothing to do with your claim that the western Europeans were ripping Russia off with below-market prices.

I said Ukraine was ripping off Russia with lower prices, not western Europe.

It IS a former soviet state, and it's not western Europe.

It also omits mention of the fact that Russia wants "market prices" for its gas but wants to continue paying Soviet-era access prices for Ukraine's pipelines.

No other pipelines exist right now, what is it supposed to use? It's building new ones right now.

Also, it was Ukraine that backed out of the deal, not Russia, so how is it Russia's fault?

Paul McEnery

10-09-2006, 06:13 PM

On the same note, you have no evidence to the contrary either.

Honestly, I can't find any of her junk now[her name mostly brought up the killing], but give me some time.
Yeah well, I'm saving you the bother. I'm sure it'll make your opinion look good.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/chechnya/Story/0,,1720522,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/chechnya/Story/0,,1300415,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/chechnya/Story/0,,822323,00.html

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/europe/story/0,,680364,00.html

http://www.indexonline.org/en/news/articles/2006/3/russia-anna-politkovskaya-the-corrosive-evil.shtml

There. There's the first few I could find.

Samurai

10-09-2006, 06:16 PM

Orange revolutions.

Georgian conflict.

Backing out of nuclear agreements and claiming to be able to destroy Russia in a single blow.

Nato bases near Russian borders.
According to the wikipedia site, the claims of foreign involvement in the Orange revolutions are unproven, and the number of possible suspects is very long, and includes leftist groups and bitter Bush enemy George Soros. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution) So I don't think that can be proven to be Bush's fault.

The US supports a peaceful settlement of the Georgian conflict:
http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/53721.htm
The United States supports the territorial integrity of Georgia and supports only a peaceful resolution of the separatist conflict in South Ossetia. The United States views Georgia’s proposal for peace as an important first step in a peace process that should be marked by direct and frequent negotiations between the two sides. The U.S. encourages the sides, with the help of the international community, to intensify their efforts to find a sustainable and peaceful solution to the conflict.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20051026-101915-9397r.htm
"We cannot keep this black hole in the middle of such a sensitive area," Mr. Nogaideli said in the interview Tuesday. "It is in nobody's interest -- not Georgia, not the United States, not Russia -- to maintain the status quo."

He said Moscow has a greater interest in a deal in South Ossetia in light of the violence that has plagued Russian regions across the border -- from the long conflict in Chechnya to the Beslan school massacre in September 2004 to a deadly uprising earlier this month by Islamic militants in the southern Russian city of Nalchik.

But Russia has resisted Georgian efforts to bring the United States and leading European powers into the South Ossetian dispute.

Mr. Nogaideli said Georgia is determined to resolve this issue peacefully and said he had received firm pledges of U.S. support in talks this week with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other senior administration and congressional leaders.

"We were offered concrete help and engagement from the U.S. administration," he said.

U.S. officials, leery of being drawn too far into the Russia-Georgia standoff, were more cautious.

State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Miss Rice discussed with Mr. Nogaideli ways to resolve the South Ossetian problem, but the United States is not planning a "new initiative" with Georgia.

U.S.-Georgian bilateral ties have improved sharply since the 2003 Rose Revolution that brought pro-reform President Mikhail Saakashvili to power.
I don't see a problem with this stance.

I haven't heard of any threats from Bush to "destroy Russia in a single blow". In what context did he say it, and when? That doesn't make much sense, Bush has mostly been trying to gain Russia's support.

The US is reorganizing it's troop deployments and will actually be closing many bases in Europe, and moving the troops elsewhere. Not sure about NATO opening new bases, but the US is closing half of its 400 European bases, and bring 40,000 of the 90,000 troops in Europe back to the US.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june05/bases_3-24.html

The Pentagon has announced plans to shut down half of the 400 U.S. bases in Europe over the next ten years, sending about 40,000 troops and 90,000 family members back to the United States.

Brabo's unit, the 1st Infantry Division, and the 1st Armored Division are the largest organizations slated to leave. Military planners say the threat the Army spent four decades waiting to meet here, a Russian invasion during the cold war, no longer exists.
That should be seen as a good sign by Russia, right?

TheTen-EyedMan

10-09-2006, 06:24 PM

This is exactly like what happened to Cate Blanchett.

http://alumni.imsa.edu/~sverma/Images/Guerin.jpg

Michael P

10-09-2006, 06:25 PM

This is exactly like what happened to Cate Blanchett.
Wait, what?

TheTen-EyedMan

10-09-2006, 06:28 PM

Wait, what?

Veronica Guerin.

She was killed by Irish drug dealers that were funding the IRA.

berk

10-09-2006, 06:29 PM

Wait, what?He's trying to be facetious: he means Veronica Guerin, the Irish investigative journalist murdered by a gangster she wrote about.

Paul McEnery

10-09-2006, 06:30 PM

Veronica Guerin.

She was killed by Irish drug dealers that were funding the IRA.
Yeah it is. And that's another damn shame.

Michael P

10-09-2006, 06:31 PM

Veronica Guerin.

She was killed by Irish drug dealers that were funding the IRA.
Oh. I know about her. Didn't know about any Blanchett connection (I'm guessing Blanchett played her in the movie?).

TheTen-EyedMan

10-09-2006, 06:33 PM

Yeah it is. And that's another damn shame.

Bad guys sometimes win.

Look at Australia's elections from 1996 to 2004.

(that's from Olivia)

berk

10-09-2006, 06:37 PM

If nothing else, I think this thread demonstrates the bankruptcy of the entire "my country right or wrong" attitude that we've been trained to think is an essential part of being a loyal citizen.

TheTen-EyedMan

10-09-2006, 06:44 PM

If nothing else, I think this thread demonstrates the bankruptcy of the entire "my country right or wrong" attitude that we've been trained to think is an essential part of being a loyal citizen.

Will you admit that Stephen Harper is a dick then?

Samurai

10-09-2006, 06:57 PM

If nothing else, I think this thread demonstrates the bankruptcy of the entire "my country right or wrong" attitude that we've been trained to think is an essential part of being a loyal citizen.
Really? That's what they teach you under the heading of national pride in Canada? Not in the US...

berk

10-09-2006, 06:59 PM

Will you admit that Stephen Harper is a dick then?I proclaim it!

TheTen-EyedMan

10-09-2006, 07:00 PM

I proclaim it!

His wife looks like a whackjob.

I miss Mr Trudeau.

At least you had a shot of nailing Maggie. What with the Bipolar craziness and all.

TheTen-EyedMan

10-09-2006, 07:01 PM

Oh. I know about her. Didn't know about any Blanchett connection (I'm guessing Blanchett played her in the movie?).

Yesum, in 2003.

berk

10-09-2006, 07:06 PM

Really? That's what they teach you under the heading of national pride in Canada? Not in the US...I think it's an insidious message been inculcated into pretty much everyone in every country with varying degrees of success. Every time anyone thinks about criticsiing an action of their government they always have to overcome, f only at a sub-conscious level a twinge of guilt at, for example, "not supporting the troops," or some equally spurious failure of loyalty.

And Samurai, I know you won't be able to see this, but you have no idea how much Deskad's attitude to Russia reminds me of your own to the US. And no, I don't mean that I've seen you support the murder of journalists who criticise the Bush regime, just that your automatic defense of that administration comes across as the same sort of blind loyalty no matter what their actions.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 07:09 PM

I said Ukraine was ripping off Russia with lower prices, not western Europe.

It IS a former soviet state, and it's not western Europe.

No other pipelines exist right now, what is it supposed to use? It's building new ones right now.

Also, it was Ukraine that backed out of the deal, not Russia, so how is it Russia's fault?

I may have misread one of your posts.

While going back hrough the thread looking for exactly what you said I came across this:
"I am a Russian, I lived there during the nineties and have been back several times since for periods of moths during summers, and I can say this."

Seeing as in another post you mention that you're twenty, am I correct in assuming you haven't actually lived full-time in Russia since you were, at most, 14?

As to the pipelines, sure Russia should use them - and they should be prepared to pay market rates to do so not the "One rouble a year" nonsense left over from the Soviet era.

Samurai

10-09-2006, 07:25 PM

I think it's an insidious message been inculcated into pretty much everyone in every country with varying degrees of success. Every time anyone thinks about criticsiing an action of their government they always have to overcome, f only at a sub-conscious level a twinge of guilt at, for example, "not supporting the troops," or some equally spurious failure of loyalty.

And Samurai, I know you won't be able to see this, but you have no idea how much Deskad's attitude to Russia reminds me of your own to the US. And no, I don't mean that I've seen you support the murder of journalists who criticise the Bush regime, just that your automatic defense of that administration comes across as the same sort of blind loyalty no matter what their actions.
I don't think Deskad has blind loyalty to the Russian govt. He criticized Yeltsin, and we have not even begun to quiz him on whether he agrees with Putin on every single issue and stance. I bet we could find some things he isn't happy about. Similarly, as I've enumerated dozens of times, I disagree with the Republicans and Bush in many areas, from border control/immigration to spending to stem cells to various appointments to his way of doing things (inability/unwillingness to explain himself, refusal to veto bad legislation until he finally uses his 1st veto on a BS issue, etc). Bush infuriuates me sometimes. It's just that the issues I disagree with him on are generally not the popular topics around here. I've even started new threads about such things as my anger over Bush's handling of immigration and the borders, or Harriet Miers.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 07:59 PM

I find shitloads wrong with Russia.

1. Immigration.

2. Social system.

3. Army reforms.

4. The pathetic croneism and corruption.

5. Their inability to react to issues quickly.

5. The entire mass of army officers and most generals.

7. Failing to spend money on developing more social programs for homeless children.

8. The pathetic racism and xenophobia of some ethnic Russians and the Governments inability to deal with it[I'm looking at you Vlad] (This is at part because I am one of those persecuted minorities).

I said it earlier, RUSSIA IS NOT PERFECT AND NEVER WILL BE, but it is far better now than it has been in two decades.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 08:02 PM

Oh, by Vlad I meant Putin, just in case anybody got that.

More things that just came to mind...

Health Issues in general, the government is doing two things about it, jack and squat!

Same goes for the roads in big cities.

On international issues, I do not agree with Russia's stance on Iran, but I can understand it.

berk

10-09-2006, 08:26 PM

Let me be more specific: when Deskad talks about the journalist deserving to be shot because she "laughed about over a Russian soldier's grave" and "supported the Chechnyan terorists" without citing any quotes in which she makes such statements, it reminds me forcefully of the parallel situation in which anyone criticising US actions in Iraq or the NATO presence in Afghanistan is accused of not supporting ther troops, or even of supporting the terrorists. Yes, I realise you're each quite capable of criticising some specific actions of the respective govts, but there's also a strong tendancy to show blind loyalty to any activity characterised as defending the homeland, no matter how false and manipulative that characterisation may be.

Deskad

10-09-2006, 08:30 PM

I already said.. it is close to impossible that it was the government that killed her. It wouldn't make sense. The reaction of this forum is pretty much proof of that.

It was either Kadyrov or Berezowsky, but not the Kremlin's FSB.

Iangould

10-09-2006, 08:55 PM

So tell me DesSkad were the tens of billions of dolalrs worth of foreign aid the west gave Russia in the 1990s "hypcrisy" too?

Because any time you guys feel like payng it back would be fine with us.

Adam Crocker

10-09-2006, 08:57 PM

I come from an area right next to it, and I know about Chechen history and have talked to Chechens.

Also, I had to witness 350 children from my country die because of Chechens.

I feel that I have some right of opinion as to how and what is happening in that part of the world.

Since we're using deaths of country men to justify one's opinion of the conflict in Chechnya, what do you have to say about the estimated 80,000 dead Chechen civilians (http://www.hrvc.net/htmls/references.htm) because of Russia's invasion of Chechnya in 1994, long before Salafi extremists began launching terrorist attacks in Russia? Or those killed in the second Chechen war by the Russian Army who engaged in Latin American death-squad style tactics (http://www.genocidewatch.org/chechnyaatrocitiesJune2002.htm) under Putin?

My guess, it was the current Chechen prezident Kadyrov or some ultra-nationalist group that hired the kill. She was heavily critisizing Kadyrov's government, and take it from a caucasian, we don't take that kind of shit lightly.

So, it's alright to kill journalists who criticise your government? Lovely.

And I notice you still haven't substantied your claims about Anna Politkovskaya a woman who was involved in negotiating the release of hostages held during the Moscow Theatre hostage crisis. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5416238.stm)

In October 2002, she was one of the few people to enter the Moscow theatre, where Chechen militants had seized hundreds of hostages, in a bid to negotiate.

In 2004, she tried to go to Beslan during the school siege but fell ill with food poisoning on the flight there. Some suspected a plot to incapacitate her.

Adam Crocker

10-09-2006, 09:03 PM

I already said.. it is close to impossible that it was the government that killed her. It wouldn't make sense. The reaction of this forum is pretty much proof of that.

No, how is the reaction of the forum proof that the FSB or some government associated party could not have killed Politkovskaya? And what explanation have you offered why they couldn't possibly do it?

moebius

10-10-2006, 01:39 AM

No, how is the reaction of the forum proof that the FSB or some government associated party could not have killed Politkovskaya? And what explanation have you offered why they couldn't possibly do it?

Especially in light of what happened to Yushchenko in the Ukraine. I mean...poisoning his soup? Pro-Russian mobs beating Pro-Yushchenko voters in the streets during the election...on film? Subtle? Not so much.

Coming at it from the "biased Western political science" perspective, Russia has deep economic and social problems. It started when they screwed up privatization (admittedly on bad advice from the IMF), but some level of economic retraction was inevitable out of a command economy. Russia's economic problems were compounded by profound corruption. In the 1990s, Poland got something like 16 times the foreign direct investment of Russia...because Poland had rule of law. When a Russian firm wanted to screw their foreign partner, they did, and investors knew they'd get no remedy in a Russian court, so they didn't bother to invest.

Under Putin, Russia's social problems have gotten significantly worse. Russian ultra-nationalism, once the domain of the LDP, has now made its way out into the streets, where tens of thousands of neo-Nazis now beat foreign university students based on their ethnic background, when they aren't assaulting gay rights activists on the streets of Moscow (including an openly-gay German parliamentarian, who went to Moscow to join the protest).

In addition, the government has a tendency to imprison critics of the regime, wholly aside from the possibility that they are assassinating journalists.

So, the "Weimar Russia" label is both appropriate and perhaps prescient. A once great power humbled by military defeat goes into economic collapse, only to decide that the answer is a dismantling of democracy and a return to a form of (soft-moderate) authoritarianism.

I don't think you'll find an American political scientist who is terribly positive about Russia... I don't know about Europeans. And this isn't because they're "paid by the West", it's because they've studied the region (most of them have spent one or more years there teaching or researching) and come to objective conclusions about what they've seen.

Though I admit there is a "pro-freedom" bias amongst the traditionally liberal academic establishment. Russia is now considered "not free" by Freedom House, the premiere non-profit think tank monitoring political freedoms. In 2005, Russia scored a 6 on political liberties (of 7; 7 is bad) and a 5 on civil liberties (of 7). Under Yeltsin, the scores were 3 and 3 (partly free).

Here's the latest FH report (http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=22&year=2006&country=7044) on Russia.

Tages

10-10-2006, 02:31 AM

cactusmaac

10-10-2006, 03:53 AM

Justin Davis

10-10-2006, 07:55 AM

Deskad, I applaud your efforts on this thread, though it lacks the finesse of your strenuous insistence on Rumbles some months back that Stalin's bodycount was a malicious lie manufactured by Western media to make one of the greatest leaders in Russian history look bad.

Wow, talk about bringing a subject to a screeching halt. I can almost hear everyone who has argued with Deskad say, "Oh, well, fuck this then" after reading that.

Paul McEnery

10-10-2006, 02:54 PM

Wow, talk about bringing a subject to a screeching halt. I can almost hear everyone who has argued with Deskad say, "Oh, well, fuck this then" after reading that.
Not quite. Here's an article from the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1891506,00.html)about this whole ghastly business, which will show nicely the kind of company Deskad does and doesn't keep:

The Moscow Union of Journalists chimed in yesterday in a statement, saying "the murder of Anna Politkovskaya is a new attack on democracy, freedom of speech and openness in Russia".
For years Politkovskaya, a mother of two, was a hero to the liberal opposition. She pursued human rights abuses in Chechnya for Novaya Gazeta and, occasionally, the Guardian. She exposed stories of cruelty: the torture and kidnap of civilians, the sale of corpses by Russian soldiers to relatives desperate to respect Islamic rites of burial.

She was reckless in her contempt for those she despised, calling her nemesis, pro-Moscow Chechen prime minister Ramzan Kadyrov, a "coward armed to the teeth and surrounded by bodyguards" - a terrible insult to a man in the Caucasus - just days before her death. But her main enemy was Putin, the man who gained political capital on the back of the Russian army's second bloody charge into Grozny in late 1999, and the man she said she hated "for his cynicism, for his racism, his lies, for the massacre of the innocents that went on throughout his first term as president".

...

Mikhail Gorbachev, the former Soviet leader who is a shareholder in Novaya Gazeta, was quick to express his outrage at the "savage crime" which had struck "a blow to the entire democratic, independent press".

And many blame the Kremlin for Politkovskaya's death. While her work never implicated Putin in anything that could have rocked his leadership, she was the scourge of bureaucrats and the hawkish security officers who dominate his administration. Vladimir Pribylovsky, an analyst from the Panorama thinktank, says Politkovskaya's enemies were numerous. "She was on at least six lists of 'enemies of the state' placed on the internet by ultra-nationalists. In one of the lists, 'for liquidation' was written next to her name."

"Of course, no one believes that Putin sat in his office and said to two thugs, 'I want Politkovskaya dead'," says Viktor Shenderovich, a friend of the reporter who was driven off the NTV channel for lampooning the president in his programme Kukli, the Russian equivalent of Spitting Image. "But the fact is he has created the kind of country where it is possible to kill a journalist - maybe to please him - and then feel untouchable afterwards." For many, the fact that Politkovskaya was assassinated on Putin's birthday, and two days after Kadyrov's 30th birthday celebrations, raised suspicions that a henchman of one or both had served up the contract hit as an unasked-for present.

Equally likely - and one version entertained by Politkovskaya's colleagues - is that Kadyrov's rivals in the federal security services or the increasingly splintered leadership in Grozny killed her in order to discredit him.

Defenders of press freedom think that is splitting hairs. "The result of Anna's death is simple," says Alexei Simonov, head of the Glasnost Defence Foundation. "Every journalist will now practise self-censorship: think thrice, before you write."

Ray R.

10-10-2006, 03:33 PM

I wouldn't call it Weimar Russia since the population seem solidly behind Putin. Weimar was intensely divided.

Still it's very far from being a healthy society. Male life expectancy is about 59, the same level as sub-Saharan Africa and the population is shrinking by about 750,000 each year. The traffic death rate is four times that of Britain, the suicide rate five times and the murder rate is twenty times higher than Western Europe's.

In terms of economics, the energy sector - about the only money-maker the country has - has seen costs, inefficiency and corruption spiral since Yukos was nationalised and the Kremlin shoved its' oar in.

In terms of politics, there is no serious political opposition to Putin, all broadcast media outlets are run by the government or its' allies and regional governors have had more and more of their powers stripped away. That's not even counting Russia getting very huffy about Ukraine and Georgia.

As someone who HAS been there a half dozen times in the last nine years, and someone who is MARRIED (soon EX-) to a Russian citizen, you pretty much encapsulated the situation in a nutshell, maac.

I spent most of my time in Moscow and St. Petersburg, and can sit here and list both anecdotes and serious discussions I've had with Muscovites and Petersburgians about the serious flaws that exist in their society right now, particularly as it applies to ingrained corruption, middle-man skimming and extortion, and the VAST disparity of wealth. It's not the Wild West, it's Chicago circa the 1920s and 1930s with Capone in charge.

We can discuss the "New Russian" flight of capital out of country, the devaluation of the ruble, the numerous failures and Ponzi schemes involving banks and how it created a whole class of destitute pensioners. There's nothing like passing four or five babushkas (old women) begging for kopecks in front of churches and metro stations.

What used to be an oligarch-run society in the nineties, is now firmly back in state control, but at least the goddamn oligarchs were more interested in presenting independent news and media once in a while because it sold ad time and newspapers, instead of circling the wagons to present packaged and government-approved news stories.

The energy sector is doing well, true enough. There are IKEAs and Lord & Taylors and Home Depots and the like are doing well with a solid, if not secure, middle class and New Russians who spend like drunken sailors. Cross the street and you'll just as likely be nearly run over by a dickhead driving a $60,000 Mercedez as an old OKA. I see Russia as a work in progress, not an emerging economic power trying to shake off the yoke of Western political scientists. The rule of law there is non-existent. You want something done, you pay a bribe. You're foreign and you want something done, the bribe is bigger.

I love Russia. I love the Russian people. But their society, government and culture are fucked up right now. And will probably be fucked up for a long time to come.

king mob

11-20-2006, 10:34 AM

An interesting development...

Photographs of the former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko in a London hospital were released today, revealing the extent of his injuries for the first time since he was poisoned.
The images show Mr Litvinenko sitting up in his hospital bed at University College London, where he is being treated for the effects of thallium, a rat poison that attacks the central nervous system.

His family gave permission for the pictures to be released to show the effects of what they believe was a deliberate poisoning. He has lost all his hair and looks far older than his 44 years.

It emerged today that the former spy was moved into intensive care overnight as a "precautionary measure" after his condition deteriorated.
Mr Litvinenko, a former colonel in the FSB - successor to the KGB - and fierce critic of the Russian president Vladimir Putin, collapsed after a meeting with an Italian man in a sushi bar in central London on November 1.

The Kremlin today dismissed allegations that the Russian government was involved in the poisoning.

Dmitry Peskov, a senior spokesman, said: "We don't consider it possible to comment on the statements accusing the Kremlin because it is nothing but sheer nonsense."

Mr Litvinenko had been investigating the murder of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya and was said to have received documents that claimed to name her killers.

Friends have said that he met two Russian men - one a former KGB officer - for tea at a hotel in London shortly before his meeting at the sushi bar.

Doctors initially thought he had food poisoning but tests revealed he had been poisoned with thallium.

The former spy, who is under 24-hour armed guard, has been unable to eat since the suspected attack at the beginning of the month and is having to be fed intravenously.

Doctors said there was a risk of heart and kidney failure and gave him only a 50/50 chance of survival.

Scotland Yard today confirmed that it was treating the case as a suspected deliberate poisoning.

A spokesman said the investigation was in its "early stages" and there had been no arrests.

Detectives were examining Mr Litvinenko's movements around the time of the poisoning, including any meeting he might have had before or after his appointment at the sushi restaurant.

It emerged today that Mr Litvinenko, who was granted asylum and citizenship after defecting to Britain six years ago, had been targeted in a previous attack in London two years ago.

A petrol bomb thrown at his home exploded, damaging the front of the property.

Alex Golfarb, who brought Mr Litvinenko to Britain and is also a fierce critic of the Russian government, visited him in hospital again today.

He told reporters that he believed his friend would pull through because he is such a "strong willed" person.

"It is a very hard sight to see. Just a month ago he was a fit, vigorous and handsome man who was exercising and running five miles a day but now he is in this condition in hospital fighting for his life," he said.

He said his friend had been able to speak to detectives this morning about the case.

"His speech is a little bit distorted but he can speak without pain and he has been interviewed by the police and has just been seen by detectives," Mr Golfarb said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1952866,00.html