Ukraines PM - "We still remember well the Soviet invasion of Ukraine and Germany. "

irishinrussia

Yes all supporters of Putin and Russia are Kremlin trollbots, and all enemies of Putin and Russia are paid for Langleybots. See how easy that little game is to play.

The limitations on press freedom are much exaggerated by Western media - I live here and while state television is very pro government, there are plenty of independent TV stations (often local) and print media and no obstacles to internet use. I am somewhat sceptical of all the NGOs that seem to pop up and criticise states and governments that oppose the West. Very often being a journalist and dying in Russia of anything other than old age seems to be considered a journalist dying in suspicious circumstances. A journalist called Kirill Pankratov for The Exile (thrown out of Russia, so hardly a pro-government mouthpiece), in an article entitled Liars Without Borders, made this very clear.

Icepick

irishinrussia wrote: »

Yes all supporters of Putin and Russia are Kremlin trollbots, and all enemies of Putin and Russia are paid for Langleybots. See how easy that little game is to play.

The limitations on press freedom are much exaggerated by Western media - I live here and while state television is very pro government, there are plenty of independent TV stations (often local) and print media and no obstacles to internet use. I am somewhat sceptical of all the NGOs that seem to pop up and criticise states and governments that oppose the West. Very often being a journalist and dying in Russia of anything other than old age seems to be considered a journalist dying in suspicious circumstances. A journalist called Kirill Pankratov for The Exile (thrown out of Russia, so hardly a pro-government mouthpiece), in an article entitled Liars Without Borders, made this very clear.

Provide links to said russian independent sources.

irishinrussia

Icepick wrote: »

Provide links to said russian independent sources.

I don't think I can provide links as I have only joined Boards.ie recently and until you reach a certain number of posts it seems links are not possible. Furthermore, unfortunately the Exile article is now behind a paywall. Newspapers like Vedemosti, Delevoi Peterburg, Novaya Gazeta, The Moscow and St Petersburg Times (English language) and Pravda (the real one, mouthpiece of the KPRF, as opposed to the more or less independent but nonetheless tabloid rag Komsomolskaya Pravda) are all independent publications that I know of off the top of my head.

Icepick

irishinrussia wrote: »

I don't think I can provide links as I have only joined Boards.ie recently and until you reach a certain number of posts it seems links are not possible. Furthermore, unfortunately the Exile article is now behind a paywall. Newspapers like Vedemosti, Delevoi Peterburg, Novaya Gazeta, The Moscow and St Petersburg Times (English language) and Pravda (the real one, mouthpiece of the KPRF, as opposed to the more or less independent but nonetheless tabloid rag Komsomolskaya Pravda) are all independent publications that I know of off the top of my head.

You can post full addresses of articles critical of Putin and his policies. We can copy paste.

Gatling

So we apparently have rebels pushing to take more areas with 150 separate assaults in east ukraine alone with rebels saying there been backed by there guests .
Who have pushed heavy weapons and new anti air defence systems to government controlled areas .
Been it's highly likely the cease-fire has already been torn up by the kremlin I hope new sanctions follow .

Elmer Blooker

Gatling wrote: »

So we apparently have rebels pushing to take more areas with 150 separate assaults in east ukraine alone with rebels saying there been backed by there guests .
Who have pushed heavy weapons and new anti air defence systems to government controlled areas .
Been it's highly likely the cease-fire has already been torn up by the kremlin I hope new sanctions follow .

Sources please. Jen Psaki? Andriy Lysenko? Yats? Porky? ....... oh forget it!!!

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Sources please. Jen Psaki? Andriy Lysenko? Yats? Porky? ....... oh forget it!!!

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0LH14T20150214?irpc=932

Elmer Blooker

Gatling wrote: »

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0LH14T20150214?irpc=932

Reuters, Jen Psaki, whats the difference?
Interesting the way our free independent and impartial media cover up and deny the very existence of these bandits. Now who on earth is funding these gangs in a country thats totally bankrupt?
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150213/1018243253.html
Censorship only exists in Russia!!

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Reuters, Jen Psaki, whats the difference?
Interesting the way our free independent and impartial media cover up and deny the very existence of these bandits. Now who on earth is funding these in a country thats totally bankrupt?
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150213/1018243253.html
Censorship only exists in Russia!!

Is this politics or AH

Elmer Blooker

Gatling wrote: »

Is this politics or AH

I'm just curious why little or nothing is known here in the EU about these far right militias who seem to operate independent of Kiev as the link in my previous post clearly shows.

gandalf

Well as expected the Russians spoke peace but are practising warfare and destruction with their proxy and real army. Flooding the occupied Eastern Territories with Heavy Weapons after the Minsk agreement was signed. Sanctions need to be toughened and the Ukrainians need to be armed. Merkels Neville Chamberlain impression has only given the Putin regime the green light to continue on their destabilisation project in the Ukraine.

gandalf

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I'm just curious why little or nothing is known here in the EU about these far right militias who seem to operate independent of Kiev as the link in my previous post clearly shows.

The site you quoted is owned by Rossíya Sevódnya.

Rossíya Sevódnya is an international news agency founded by a decree of the Russian President on 9 December 2013.

Hardly a good source now is it.

Gatling

gandalf wrote: »

Well as expected the Russians spoke peace but are practising warfare and destruction with their proxy and real army. Flooding the occupied Eastern Territories with Heavy Weapons after the Minsk agreement was signed. Sanctions need to be toughened and the Ukrainians need to be armed. Merkels Neville Chamberlain impression has only given the Putin regime the green light to continue on their destabilisation project in the Ukraine.

Come Monday russia will say there not party to any cease fire because there not there and don't have any influence over rebel groups

Elmer Blooker

gandalf wrote: »

The site you quoted is owned by Rossíya Sevódnya.

Rossíya Sevódnya is an international news agency founded by a decree of the Russian President on 9 December 2013.

Hardly a good source now is it.

What exactly are you trying to say? Dmytro Yarosh and Right Sector don't exist?

gandalf

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

What exactly are you trying to say? Dmytro Yarosh and Right Sector don't exist?

What I am saying is the site you are using as a source is directly spreading Russian Regime propaganda and you are helping them to disseminate it.

There are right wing extremists on both sides of this equation but there is only one nation using the sudetenland playbook from 1938. They are the true danger to Europe.

irishinrussia

Icepick wrote: »

You can post full addresses of articles critical of Putin and his policies. We can copy paste.

novayagazeta.ru/comments/67172

novayagazeta.ru/comments/67152

novayagazeta.ru/comments/66418

novayagazeta.ru/news/1691623

novayagazeta.ru/comments/66361

sptimes.ru/index_bp.php?action_id=2&story_id=41655&section=3

sptimes.ru/story/29796

sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=41696

A good one to demonstrate what "Liberals" in Russia really think;
themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/399397

You'll have to add the www yourself and html, even including this seems to activate the post blocking system.

Icepick

irishinrussia wrote: »

novayagazeta.ru/comments/67172

novayagazeta.ru/comments/67152

novayagazeta.ru/comments/66418

novayagazeta.ru/news/1691623

novayagazeta.ru/comments/66361

sptimes.ru/index_bp.php?action_id=2&story_id=41655&section=3

sptimes.ru/story/29796

sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=41696

A good one to demonstrate what "Liberals" in Russia really think;
themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/399397

You'll have to add the www yourself and html, even including this seems to activate the post blocking system.

So you found two (SP & Moscow Times are published by the same Finnish company).
SP and moscow times are English papers for expats living in Russia and not freely sold.
novaya gazeta is an exception and hopefully they will be able to keep publishing.

It's also ironic that you linked to articles that disprove your opinions about Putin's regime.

gandalf

Icepick wrote: »

So you found two (SP & Moscow Times are published by the same Finnish company).
SP and moscow times are English papers for expats living in Russia and not freely sold.

They soon will not be able to continue publishing due to media ownership laws in Russia.

woodrow wyatt

gandalf wrote: »

They soon will not be able to continue publishing due to media ownership laws in Russia.

Do you think its a good idea to have foreign ownership of media in a country?
How about a news paper owned by a Saudi in the USA pushing the line ISIL are the good guys?

gandalf

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

Do you think its a good idea to have foreign ownership of media in a country?

Absolutely, it is good to have fresh eyes look at a countries issues and problems. Unless you are a closed mind that doesn't believe in an alternative narrative based on facts.

How about a news paper owned by a Saudi in the USA pushing the line ISIL are the good guys?

But that is not the case with the Moscow Times, I read it and it has articles and opinions representing both sides. I would content that it is quite a balanced media organisation and does try to maintain a balanced view based on the facts available.

They are a dying breed in Russia though. A media organisation that doesn't report the Regimes propaganda as gospel, tends to fall foul of ownership laws or doesn't have their broadcast licenses renewed or if they are individual journalists they can even get murdered.

woodrow wyatt

You do know they have not banned all foreign ownership , it just cannot be more than 20%.
I believe in the UK it is at 30% so you are making a big deal out of nothing.

irishinrussia

Icepick wrote: »

So you found two (SP & Moscow Times are published by the same Finnish company).
SP and moscow times are English papers for expats living in Russia and not freely sold.
novaya gazeta is an exception and hopefully they will be able to keep publishing.

It's also ironic that you linked to articles that disprove your opinions about Putin's regime.

For god's sake I provided you with links, after giving you a list of media outlets, you're just going to label everything I provide as an exception, or this or that is not acceptable aren't you? Until recently the St Petersburg Times was freely available, all over the city - for free. However it is unprofitable and for this reason, not censorship, it has withdrawn its print version and simply publishes online now. This, by the way, is the real reason there is a lack of "Liberal" media - because it is not profitable. I gave you a list of other publications, there are more, such as Argumenti I Fakti which are not opposition publications but do publish articles critical of social and economic issues in the country. The Communist party has its paper. Vedemosti and Delevoi Peterburg are independent. Those are just some major ones. Just because a paper doesn't call for the violent overthrow of the government, doesn't mean it is government controlled.

Also, don't be facetious. The articles don't disprove my opinions (can opinions be proved or disproved? surely once they are proved or disproved they are no longer opinions, but facts?) about Putin's regime - they just provide an alternative opinion about the government to mine - something you deny exists in the Russian media, and something I was asked to prove existed - rather they prove my claim. I could just as easily say that the existence of my opinions disproves the opinions of those newspapers. It is a non sequitur. The whole point was that publications exist in Russia which are critical of and opposed to the government. The existence of such publications backs up my view that while the press situation is far from ideal, it is not the massively censored, totalitarian state propped up by propaganda and repression of press freedom that some would like to present it as.

gandalf

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

You do know they have not banned all foreign ownership , it just cannot be more than 20%.
I believe in the UK it is at 30% so you are making a big deal out of nothing.

I don't believe that is the case in the UK. Can you show me the appropriate law stating that.

I am aware that the London Evening Standard, The Independent and The Independent on Sunday are all in the ownership of a Russian Oligarch who was a former KGB agent though.

Icepick

irishinrussia wrote: »

This, by the way, is the real reason there is a lack of "Liberal" media - because it is not profitable.

that says it all

can opinions be proved or disproved?

of course. Was this a serious question?

surely once they are proved or disproved they are no longer opinions, but facts?

ok, lies then

The existence of such publications backs up my view that while the press situation is far from ideal, it is not the massively censored, totalitarian state propped up by propaganda and repression of press freedom that some would like to present it as.

It's not on the Iranian or North Korean level yet. I didn't say it was.

Icepick

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

You do know they have not banned all foreign ownership , it just cannot be more than 20%.
I believe in the UK it is at 30% so you are making a big deal out of nothing.

If it actually was 30%, it would be a big deal.
The Times is owned by Murdoch for example.

woodrow wyatt

Icepick wrote: »

If it actually was 30%, it would be a big deal.
The Times is owned by Murdoch for example.

The official position is that the UK allows almost any foreign ownership , but the Industry Act (1975) enables the UK government to prohibit transfer to foreign owners of 30% or more of important U.K. manufacturing businesses, if such a transfer would be contrary to the interests of the country. Yes this covers media ownership.
In other words if the UK government approves of you there is no problem, but they can block you if they don’t approve of you.

gandalf

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

The official position is that the UK allows almost any foreign ownership , but the Industry Act (1975) enables the UK government to prohibit transfer to foreign owners of 30% or more of important U.K. manufacturing businesses, if such a transfer would be contrary to the interests of the country. Yes this covers media ownership.
In other words if the UK government approves of you there is no problem, but they can block you if they don’t approve of you.

This sounds like hogwash. Who says that this covers media ownership? Is this your opinion or is it someone of substance?

The act is from 1975 but the act in Russia was passed last year and is a direct assault on the alternative point of view in Russia and is primarily a crude effort to control the message to the Russian population.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/curbs-on-foreign-ownership-will-gut-russia-s-media/507931.html

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/15-global-companies-hit-by-russia-s-law-limiting-foreign-ownership-of-media/507968.html

woodrow wyatt

gandalf wrote: »

The act is from 1975 but the act in Russia was passed last year and is a direct assault on the alternative point of view in Russia and is primarily a crude effort to control the message to the Russian population.

Just goes to show Russia is 40 years behind the west in curbing foreign influence in the media and controlling what the public see in the media.

gandalf

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

Just goes to show Russia is 40 years behind the west in curbing foreign influence in the media and controlling what the public see in the media.

It shows nothing of the sort at all. You have not demonstrated that the act you quote has any ramifications at all with regard to media ownership.

On the other hand the RF laws enacted last year are targeted specifically at media ownership and are a crude attempt to control what is said to the general Russian populace and who says it to them.

woodrow wyatt

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/68/contents
There you go, should keep you busy for a few hours, enjoy!

Lemming

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/68/contents
There you go, should keep you busy for a few hours, enjoy!

That's stopping short of going "here's google, do a search".

Since you seem to be so intimately versed, you'll have no trouble citing the relevant wording by section and paragraph from the Industrial Act of 1975, or of course any subsequent acts that have superceeded said wording ... You should, no doubt I'm sure with your savvy political acumen, also be aware that what you cite may not actually have been enacted yet given that you have linked to an incomplete document with changes pending, rather than the actual enacted, original document and any subsequent enacted revisions.

Scofflaw

woodrow wyatt wrote: »

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/68/contents
There you go, should keep you busy for a few hours, enjoy!

This kind of "here's the website, off you go" shtick is not acceptable. If you're banned - as you will be if you carry on as at present - who will continue your defence of Mother Russia?

moderately,
Scofflaw

PopePalpatine

The deputy head of the Duma Committee on IT has called for VPNs, browsers like TOR and web proxies to be banned. No doubt Putin's Internetschutzstaffel will be on hand to engage in whataboutery.

woodrow wyatt

PopePalpatine wrote: »

The deputy head of the Duma Committee on IT has called for VPNs, browsers like TOR and web proxies to be banned. No doubt Putin's Internetschutzstaffel will be on hand to engage in whataboutery.

The US government pay for 60% of Tor’s developmnt.
washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/09/06/the-feds-pays-for-60-percent-of-tors-development-can-users-trust-it/

How US and UK spy agencies defeat internet privacy and security.
theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/nsa-gchq-encryption-codes-security

NSA has VPNs in Vulcan death grip.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/nsa-has-vpns-in-vulcan-death-grip-no-really-thats-what-they-call-it/

How “omnipotent” hackers tied to NSA hid for 14 years—and were found at last.
http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/02/how-omnipotent-hackers-tied-to-the-nsa-hid-for-14-years-and-were-found-at-last/

As you can see its all about context, the reason to ban them is they are completely compromised by western intelligence services.
Lets be honest if Russian had done all these security exploits they would be banned in the west as well.
You are making a big deal out of a country trying to protect its self from hacking and spying from a foreign power, we in the west would be demanding the same action if Russia or China was caught doing the same