PDA

View Full Version : Why you hate us?



Pages : [1] 2

WebErr
September 26th, 2006, 02:41 AM
I reading Newsweek and crying... why you hate us? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14870274/site/newsweek/ Why Russia always wrong??? Why russians always evil??? Why??? !!! This is another view. Please, read it. Don't make mistake! We looking to you with hope!!! http://www.exile.ru/2006-September-22/feature_story.html /// Always ugly evil russian.

Edward
September 26th, 2006, 09:00 AM
"You" in the thread title - who it refers to?

SilentPandaesq
September 26th, 2006, 09:10 AM
"You" in the thread title - who it refers to?

What? you no understand! You refer to "you", but not "you" since you is a decent people.

Ninjahedge
September 26th, 2006, 09:54 AM
Um, Web?

Did you read the full story or just the part that said "Russia is weak"?

Rea dteh article, quote some passages, and tell us what, specifically, you do not agree with.

Does your country have a capable army after the break up of the USSR? How are your oil assets? If teh article is wrong, let us know.

But also tell us where you are getting your news from that says these things are wrong.

It is always good to have more than one perspective on things so you can truly tell where it is located.

WebErr
September 26th, 2006, 10:41 AM
Well, you do not living here. You can't see anything farther then your nose. First rule of wizard... read Terry Goodkind. Army for what? Russia is not in the war. We have Spetsnaz. :) Oil? 8-10%! Looks like primitive desinformation. We strong in the technology, medicine, science, .... USSR died, but smart people is here anyway. Read answer of american, living here, in my first post. WHY RUSSIA IS WEEK??!

SilentPandaesq
September 26th, 2006, 11:07 AM
Wait, are you asking us why We (i.e. Americans ) think that Russia is week?

Or are you telling us that Russia is week and are asking us to explain it to you?

The answer to both questions is, don't believe everything you read on the inter-web.

Russia is doing alright for itself, so don't worry about it.


p.s. - you have an army...who is beating up on Grozny....

Ninjahedge
September 26th, 2006, 12:25 PM
Well, you do not living here. You can't see anything farther then your nose.

Um, bad way to start a discussion.


First rule of wizard... read Terry Goodkind. Army for what? Russia is not in the war. We have Spetsnaz. :)

Translate Spetsnaz. Also, you are still involved in many military operations. Sometimes you need an army to keep you OUT of war.


Oil? 8-10%! Looks like primitive desinformation.

Please tell us what this 8% stands for. Also tell us where it is coming from, what your reserves and refineries are like and what you are doing in order to utilize that resource.


We strong in the technology, medicine, science, .... USSR died, but smart people is here anyway. Read answer of american, living here, in my first post. WHY RUSSIA IS WEEK??!

You ask why is it weak, and post several articles, but do not go into discussing why you believe them to be incorrect. Do US a favor and tell US why you are not weak.

We are not contradicting you, but if you want to try to state your case and validate what you are saying, you need to do more than say "8%-10%!".

If you are looking to yell and scream about something, you have come to the wrong forum.

milleniumcab
September 26th, 2006, 07:41 PM
It sounds like sour grapes to me...

Ninjahedge
September 26th, 2006, 07:44 PM
It sounds like sour grapes to me...

You can hear sour grapes?

Jake
September 26th, 2006, 10:24 PM
Reasons why we don't like Russia:

-there is that little matter of NUCLEAR WARHEADS THAT ARE POINTED AT MY HOUSE, now I know that the Cold War is over and we're not fighting anymore but the the USSR was run by Russia and we were each other's "enemy" for half a century. Even if we became best buddies from now on things like this don't change overnight.

-Putin is nationalizing many of your industries which is going against everything capitalism stands for. Make a decision, are you capitalist or mercantalist? Moreover your Gazprom is a really risky business, you can't have one giant company like that. We are concerned with your economic stability which could fail and ruin a lot of good trading partnerships. Look at it this way, the collapse of Enron sent shockwaves through the US economy, yet Enron was TINY in the whole sense. Even if Exxon collapsed the damage would be nowhere near the damage Gazprom could cause.

-Iran, I'm still trying to figure out exactly what Russia's policy is on that country.

Those are just a few but trust me when I say this, we don't HATE Russia or in fact talk about your country all that much. Our politicians insult each other because think about it Putin's whole life has been dedicated to destroying the US, Bush's whole life has been dedicated to destroying the USSR.

Also of note is the fact that Russia has recently started pursuing stakes in European companies. Everyone is getting mad about this since other countries aren't doing this. You don't see the US government buying stakes in any companies, that's not a government's job. Russia needs to go back to what you were doing just a few years ago and transition to a fully privatized economy.

milleniumcab
September 26th, 2006, 11:08 PM
You can hear sour grapes?

LOOKS?..:D

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 06:03 AM
1. Don't worry about our army. This army won Chechnya. :) It was impossible war, but we won it without killing peaceful people (like in Iraq). We have absolute victory, because Chechens fill theyself as part of Russia. Ask yourself: what now in Iraq? Oil? Are you won your impossible war?! 2. Your nuclear bombs on MY house looks like more dangerious. Because US is aggressor, but Russia is peaceful country. We don't need any war. But you... You looks like Germany in 1938. 3. We have powerful system of education. As result we have smartest specialists. But we haven't concurentable concern like your Microsoft, Shell and much other. We must complete some addaptative period, other way is the way to destruction of our life style. It is way to another revolution. Ask yourself: do you need new revolution in Russia? You want it - you'll get it. Putin is smartest and strongest lider. Wiser then old fool Yeltsyn. 4. Spetsnaz - is special miniarmy for local conflicts, fast and professional. 5. Gazprom is a nonsense. But it is temporary method using for standing up our economy. 6. How may weak country reach by minerals and oil, one of most technological and have strong army in any part of military machine. 7. Our comunity is union comunity. We can say "negr" because it will be said with respect to another race. When you said "niger" - it will be said with sound of tragedy past, when afro-american was a tralls. You want to respect any another race, but historical facts say another. In Russia we see another world, but radical organizations want to destroy it. They names theyself as "Skinheads". We respect any another race and comunity and we can't understand why Cheney want to continue of Cold War?!

Gregory Tenenbaum
September 27th, 2006, 07:12 AM
I for one find Russia interesting.

WebErr we are not all the same, just like your country people are not all the same. We all think differently, just like you.

Please dont think that we all support every single policy of our government, not all of us do. Some of us do, some of us dont - thats democracy. The next election will test the present policies.

Its good that you contribute and show us your concerns. We are happy to listen to them.

What do you think is the biggest problem for the world today? Overpopulation, cross cultural violence, global warming? What?

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 08:08 AM
J. Bush and D. Cheney! Why they elected twice? It's impossible! They are not so smart for ruling your great country! Really! Why you elect them??? We are not the same like in USA too. We are polynational country, where living people of so many cultures. It is inherited from USSR. Why Bush say about V. Lenin: it is evil genious like Gitler and Ben Laden. Lenin gave us as many as possible. It was better then Tzarism or Pseudo-Democracy of 1914-1917. Ben Laden is not demolisher like Gitler. Gitler is #1 of evil genious of XX century, but Lenin is like our grandfather. Please show some respect to one who save poorest people from Tzarism and massive degradation. We have nice education only because Lenin found USSR.

lofter1
September 27th, 2006, 09:23 AM
I'm far from an expert on Chechnya (http://www.freec Chechnya.org/) / Grozny, but it seems that no one should fool themselves about the extent of damage done by the war there -- as devastating to that part of the world as the US invasion of Iraq.



This army won Chechnya. :) It was impossible war, but we won it without killing peaceful people (like in Iraq). We have absolute victory ...


Grozny (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/chechnya/index.html), the capital of Chechnya is only an apparition of its former self.
The city was badly battered during the first war in the mid-90's.
It was nearly destroyed by air strikes and artillery during the second war.

http://www.azimuthmedia.org/gallery_pics/grozny.jpg

(Photo by Natasha Maly)


http://www.hro.org/editions/karta/nr22-23/foto/grozny.jpg

See the destruction of Grozny from space ...


December 16, 1999: before the carpet bombing


http://www.freechechnya.org/images/grozny_square_before_tn.jpg (http://www.freechechnya.org/images/grozny_square_before.jpg)


March 16, 2000: after the carpet bombing:


http://www.freechechnya.org/images/grozny_square_after_tn.jpg (http://www.freechechnya.org/images/grozny_square_after.jpg)


See the destruction of Grozny from the ground


http://www.freechechnya.org/images/gr02-small.jpg (http://www.hrvc.net/htmls/images.htm)


http://www.freechechnya.org/images/grozny4-small.jpg (http://www.hrvc.net/htmls/images.htm)


http://www.freechechnya.org/images/grozny2-small.jpg (http://www.hrvc.net/htmls/images.htm)


http://www.freechechnya.org/

Gregory Tenenbaum
September 27th, 2006, 09:42 AM
J. Bush and D. Cheney! Why they elected twice? It's impossible! They are not so smart for ruling your great country! Really! Why you elect them??? We are not the same like in USA too. We are polynational country, where living people of so many cultures. It is inherited from USSR. Why Bush say about V. Lenin: it is evil genious like Gitler and Ben Laden. Lenin gave us as many as possible. It was better then Tzarism or Pseudo-Democracy of 1914-1917. Ben Laden is not demolisher like Gitler. Gitler is #1 of evil genious of XX century, but Lenin is like our grandfather. Please show some respect to one who save poorest people from Tzarism and massive degradation. We have nice education only because Lenin found USSR.

As I stated: "The next election will test the present policies."

Re Lenin, like Trotsky he did a lot to try to reform your country. It was difficult for him. I dont disrespect the man. Dont take every statement at its face value - a lot of it is for domestic politics (the audience is really us not you).

I agree that more respect ought to be given to other country's traditions.

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 09:43 AM
We always gave 3 hours for peaceful people before bombing, it's fact. After we destroying target if target is dangerous. After attack and clearing subterrain bunkers. Grozny was a fortress of terrorists and Chechen nationalists where each window hides the death for many Russian soldiers. It is war, isn't it? By the way, we was not so cruel with peaceful people like you in Iraq!

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 10:04 AM
As I stated: "The next election will test the present policies."

Re Lenin, like Trotsky he did a lot to try to reform your country. It was difficult for him. I dont disrespect the man. Dont take every statement at its face value - a lot of it is for domestic politics (the audience is really us not you).

I agree that more respect ought to be given to other country's traditions.

Thanks to you, man. Nice avatar. Who is it? Looks like Ostap Bender, hero of story "12 seats" written by Ilf and Petroff.

Gregory Tenenbaum
September 27th, 2006, 10:06 AM
Thanks to you, man. Nice avatar. Who is it?

Mironov. Russian Actor.


J. Bush and D. Cheney! Why they elected twice? It's impossible! They are not so smart for ruling your great country! Really! Why you elect them??? We are not the same like in USA too. We are polynational country, where living people of so many cultures. It is inherited from USSR. Why Bush say about V. Lenin: it is evil genious like Gitler and Ben Laden. Lenin gave us as many as possible. It was better then Tzarism or Pseudo-Democracy of 1914-1917. Ben Laden is not demolisher like Gitler. Gitler is #1 of evil genious of XX century, but Lenin is like our grandfather. Please show some respect to one who save poorest people from Tzarism and massive degradation. We have nice education only because Lenin found USSR.

I agree that more respect ought to be given to other countries traditions. Your former governments have had wars just like ours. Take AFGHANISTAN as an example AND LETS CALL IT EVEN.

But I think personally your designers are way cooler:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shtg3CHAQMU

Check out the amazing MiG-25 - it runs on VALVES and is EMP Blast Proof! Maybe I just yearn for the old days but that's just supercool!

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 10:20 AM
You can buy MIG-25 if you want. :)
Mironov, my eyes wide open... ? Are you Russian or you love Russian comedy? It was a good old times when our cinema was great... now it is usually trash... but some new cinema give me a hope in future of Russian cinematograph. I love "Turkey gambit" and "9th company"... last of them may keep Oskar... oh, I forgot it right now - it is impossible. Last Oskar taken by Russia long time ago...

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 10:36 AM
Why Russia Is Really Weak
What happens to Russia when—not if—oil and gas prices begin to retreat?

By Rajan Menon and Alexander Motyl
Newsweek International

Sept. 25, 2006 issue - News stories about Russia these days follow a predictable theme. The country is resurgent and strong, and the West must adjust to this new reality. But that story line is wrong. Russia is weak and getting weaker.
Take the conventional index of power—military might. Yes, Moscow is testing advanced missiles systems and talks buoyantly about countering a U.S. antiballistic-missile system with a new generation of warheads that can evade interceptors. Yet note the failure earlier this month of the highly touted Bulava submarine-launched missile. The United States experiences such mishaps, too, of course. But in Russia they are signs of something deeper. It's no secret that, for all Russia's new oil wealth, its Army remains poorly trained, malnourished and demoralized. Alcoholism, suicide and corruption are rife. Weaponry is aging and newer models arrive at a trickle: India has bought more Russian tanks since 2001 than the Russian Army.Russia gets credit for economic growth—nearly 7 percent this year, according to the IMF. But the boom has been propelled mainly by rising energy prices. What happens when—not if—oil and gas prices begin to retreat? New investment in production capacity is insufficient to sustain current levels of exports. Meanwhile, economic reform has stalled, state control over strategic economic industries has increased and foreign investment remains low. Of the $648.1 billion in foreign investment worldwide in 2004, only $11.6 billion went to Russia. Not surprisingly, Russia rates poorly in globalization rankings. The 2005 Foreign Policy/A.T. Kearney survey placed it 52nd in a list of 62 countries—a drop of five places from 2004.
Russia's human capital is being ravaged. The population is declining by some 750,000 annually because of low birthrates and unusually high death rates among males; it's also aging rapidly and will therefore become increasingly less productive. Alcoholism remains pervasive, as does drug use. Russia has the highest rate of tuberculosis in Europe. AIDS has yet to crest. Suicide is one the rise. According to WHO data on 46 countries between 1998 and 2003, Russia, with 71 cases per 100,000 of the male population, topped the list.
A nation's power also rests on the strength of its institutions. Here, too, Russia is growing weaker. Putin's authoritarianism has brought order to a once chaotic political scene. But Parliament has been neutered. So have independent civic organizations, political parties and media. The secret police, military and security services—no friends of the rule of law—occupy prominent political positions. Official corruption flourishes.
Abroad, Russia's influence continues to ebb. Its closest allies—Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan—are poor and politically unstable. Energy-rich Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan resent Russia's grip on their exports. Armenia, loyal but penurious, remains embroiled in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with increasingly prosperous Azerbaijan. The Kremlin's meddling in Georgia has deepened Tblisi's determination to join NATO and strengthened anti-Russian sentiment. Belarus's dictatorial president envisions union with Russia, but his Soviet-style political order repels many ordinary Russians.
On the wider global stage, Putin displays seeming strength and new confidence. Russian support is key to the negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. Its Security Council veto gives it an important say on various international issues, from Kosovo's independence to the United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon. Yet Putin's rhetoric increasingly strikes themes of Great Russia—imperial, nostalgic, nationalistic. However much it resonates with a particular Russian political class, that rhetoric can itself breed weakness.
You see this in the sharp rise of race-related hate crimes in Russia, most recently the clash between Russian xenophobes and Chechens in the north- western town of Kondopga, when a bar brawl triggered huge rallies of ultranationalists demanding the expulsion of ethnic minorities. Right-wing racism and Russia-for-Russians chauvinism augur ill for a multiethnic, multiconfessional Russia, which has near 25 million Muslims.
So, the received wisdom is wrong. What the West must live with is a weak Russia. And history shows that states that talk loudly while carrying a small stick often overreach, creating problems for themselves and others.

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 10:40 AM
And this is the answer in "The eXile"

By Mark Ames ( editor of "The Exile" )


This week's edition of Newsweek features one of the most bizarre articles I've read in a long time. It's called "Why Russia Is Really Weak," and as the schoolyard-taunting title suggests, it's a desperate attempt to convince Newsweek readers that Russia isn't as strong as they think. Really. No, really, Russia really isn't! Dontcha believe us?
It's the "Really" in the headline that's really, really revealing. Because it suggests nervousness on the part of the authors--a pair of academic beigeocrats with appropriate ethnic names: Rajan Menon and Alexander Motyl.
They're nervous--they and the presumed Newsweek reading public--for the obvious reason that Russia is actually getting much stronger. As we know, the American way to react to unpleasant turns in events is to simply deny they're happening, and then to posit their opposite, and leave it at that.
Russia wasn't supposed to get stronger, certainly not on its own, without the West's help. It just doesn't make sense. Moreover, it's somehow cosmologically wrong that Russia should become stronger right at the time when American power is in a freefall. That just ain't right...so therefore, the authors offer a solution: cup your ears, close your eyes, and scream, "Russia is really weak! Russia is really weak!" and it'll all go away, like a bad dream...
Oddly enough, the authors claim in the first paragraph that alleged Western "news stories" uniformly tout a "predictable theme"--that theme being Russia's growing strength. Moreover, these Western media outlets are guilty of an even worse sin: they're supposedly going farther by calling on Western leaders to "adjust to this new reality." In other words: appeasement.
And now Newsweek is out to set the record straight.
Umm...what the **** are Menon and Motyl talking about? What media outlets have they been smoking? And can I score some of that shit? Seriously, where are these alleged rah-rah-Russia articles appearing? In the Washington Post? The Wall Street Journal? The New York Times?
Let's take a look over the recent past at these three leading papers, the most influential opinion-formers in mainstream America, and see just how predictable and pro-Russian their editorials have been.
First, the right-wing, pro-Republican Wall Street Journal. If you went into a drug-induced coma in 1986 and woke up last week on September 14th, 2006 with a copy of the Journal on your face, you'd be happily reassured that you didn't miss much in the way of historical events: the Cold War's still going strong, according to that edition's editorial, "The New New Russians," which argues that doing any business with Russia is dangerous for the free world: "For the Kremlin, gas, oil, metals, aircraft are not just tradeable goods. They are also tools of political power and security leverage. To devise the proper response on this side of the old Iron Curtain, that must be kept in mind." After reading that, you could smile, bang a couple more baggies of pure Persian Grey, and hibernate another 20 years without worrying about missing much.
Indeed, there's something comforting about the Journal editorial's choice of words and imagery: a nefarious Kremlin, the Iron Curtain, and the ever-naive West, which is such a decent, trusting fella, and so dedicated to keeping business and geopolitics apart, that it simply cannot fathom that another country, especially a country run by white guys, could be so cynical as to cheat, mixing business with politics. Wake up, guys! Before it's too late!
On the other side of the mainstream media political spectrum from the Journal is the Washington Post, whose Op-Ed page leans towards what you might call "Lieberman Democrats." You know, real leftie stuff. Because America has such a diverse and free press. So how does the Post's take on Putin's Russia differ from the Journal's? I won't keep you hanging, so here goes, the concluding paragraph to an August 23rd editorial: "The West relies on Russian energy supplies at its peril."
Wait, what? Isn't that what the Journal's point was? Bingo. But you wouldn't need to have read to the end to figure that out: the Post's editorial was headlined: "An Energetic Bully, Kremlin-backed energy monopolies are bad for Russia and Europe." Okay, it's a little strange that America's right-wing paper and its center-left paper repeat each other in ways not predicted by Newsweek. Indeed, the "right" and the "center-left" repeat each other so much--in the leadup to the G-8 summit in July, both the Journal and the Post essentially called on the West to either boycott or throw Russia out of the organization--you'd almost think that the same guy is penning both papers' Russia editorials.
Moreover, one might point out the raw hypocrisy of the Post attacking the Kremlin for mixing geopolitics with energy supplies when, after all...well, I'll just quote the Post's own story:
Politics Of the Pipelines: U.S. Seeks Ways to Route Natural Gas Around Russia
By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
July 11, 2006
For a low-profile State Department official, Matthew J. Bryza gets around. A member of the bureau of European and Eurasian affairs, he frequents places such as Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan. This year, he's also popped in on people in Brussels, Rome and Berlin. One key item on his agenda: persuading governments and energy companies to build natural gas pipelines that skirt Russia.
Right, so there goes that argument.
But anyway, I don't want to dwell here about insane Western double-standards towards Russia, a problem as rampant as oral herpes. We're all sick of hearing about that. This article is focusing on something new: Newsweek's claim that a) the Western press is uniformly touting Russia's power and calling on the West to submit to the new reality, and b) the Western press is wrong, because what neither you, I, nor John Q Public knows is that in fact, Russia is weak. "Really" weak.
So back to our hunt for evidence of Newsweek's claim, let's look at the bane of Republicans and Fox News viewers everywhere, the radical-left-wing New York Times -- you know, the paper that mainstream America is accusing of having committed treason? If anyone's gonna be predictably rah-rah-Russia and pro-appeasement, it's gotta be the Times, right?
Welp, read this recent Times editorial and tell me what you think: "With energy prices high and money pouring in, it would be easy for the Russians to see themselves in a position of strength and refuse to give ground. But behind the facade of strength are long-term weaknesses." Hey! Wait a minute! Did I just quote the New York Times or Newsweek? Let's go back and quote the first paragraph to the current Newsweek story: "News stories about Russia these days follow a predictable theme. The country is resurgent and strong, and the West must adjust to this new reality. But that story line is wrong. Russia is weak and getting weaker." And now the Times: "But behind the facade of strength are long-term weaknesses."
If Newsweek is right about anything, it's that stories about Russia do follow a predictable theme. And that theme is this: they all sound like the Newsweek article. Which is to say, they're all desperately scrambling for a way to convince themselves that Russia is not getting back on its feet, while at the same time, Russia is a menace. That's the point of the Newsweek article, and just about every other American media outlet opinion on Russia, as summed up in the conclusion:
"So, the received wisdom is wrong. What the West must live with is a weak Russia. And history shows that states that talk loudly while carrying a small stick often overreach, creating problems for themselves and others." Hell, who cares if this is completely self-contradictory and illogical. After all, Newsweek's readers probably also read the Bible. The less sense it makes, the more persuasive it is.
Why the gloating and hatred? What bothers all of these journalists and opinion-makers more than anything is the fact that Russia is "confident," even "overconfident"--a word that they come back to over and over. "Confidence": it's a state of mind that America hasn't been feeling for, oh, about 3 years now. And that...hurts.
You have to understand that America values self-confidence more than life itself, more than health or happiness or family or food. Confidence=Winner= America. The only other people allowed to feel confident are those who are grateful to us. Their confidence is permissible only as a sub-set of our confidence--they can be confident only after adopting our way of life, like the Czechs, for example.
The nerve of Russia to both reject the US, to get back on its feet without our help (indeed in spite of what we've done here), and then, to top it all off, to publicly display confidence!
Suddenly Uncle Sam is turned into Yosemite Sam, steaming red and stomping around, shaking his fist at Bugs Russia: "Why you no good varmint! I'll show you confidence! I'm a gonna blast your self-confidence intah smithereens! Yup, I'll fill our newspapers with articles callin' yuh 'weak'! That's right! 'Weak'! Yuh hear that? Yer 'really weak,' even, Russia! Now how's that self-confidence of yers doin', yuh long-eared galoot! Mwah-hah-hah!"
* * *
The Newsweek article proving that Russia is "really weak" is not just one of the sloppiest examples of propaganda you'll ever read, it's downright nasty in a way that Americans are usually pretty good at concealing beneath a veneer of sentimental concern. If Russia is really as pathetically weak as the authors claim, then shouldn't the West feel compassion for its 142 million citizens? Shouldn't we want to help?
**** no, bitch! Celebrate! The point that the authors want to make is that Russia is weak, and so therefore...are you ready?...if we want to, we can treat Russia like shit, and not worry about it much. Except that they're so weak that they're also a danger. Which is to say, it's okay to hate Russia and to despise it for being weak, because that's all the bastards deserve. But also have a kind of contemptuous caution towards them...you know, like how we used to in the good old days.
The problem is, to convince readers today in the face of so much contrary evidence, the authors have to flat-out lie, both by omission and by, well, lying. Interestingly, to prove Russia is weak, they start by noting that a new Russian missile designed to evade Bush's Star Wars system failed in a test launch a few weeks ago. That's odd, because the entire ABM program has been marked by nothing but a series of highly-rigged tests which repeatedly fail. Over and over.
You'd think that the authors wouldn't want to make this their first piece of evidence, but they do, and very consciously so: "The United States experiences such mishaps, too, of course. But in Russia they are signs of something deeper." Now you start to see the purpose of this article: it's about making America feel better about its own gaping problems, via a false comparison, something it desperately needs. America's highly-touted, highly-corrupt, highly-insane ABM system -- which caused the first big rift in US-Russian relations post-9/11 -- has failed and failed and failed; so what you do is you find a Russian system that failed a test, and then use that to make America feel better about itself.
And we need it. The Bush years are such a throbbing bummer that they're making the Carter years look like the '84 LA Olympics. The anti-depressant to counteract Bush-Era Reality? Point out that Russia is having the same problems we have--only worse. Their problems "are signs of something deeper," implying that America's inability to rig two successful Star Wars tests in a row is not a sign of anything deep at all, such as massive corruption, militarism, stupidity and evil. No, it's just that our tests are failed tests, while Russia's failed tests actually mean its military is in total chaos.

That's funny, because the accompanying article in the same Newsweek issue announces that Russia has "won" the war in Chechnya. A war that was considered unwinnable by every Western pundit and journalist...including this Newsweek article's coauthor. In 2004, Rajan Menon wrote, "Then as now, no military or political solution was in sight...The Chechen war, in short, is a stalemate, no matter the bravado of those waging it." And a few years before that, Menon wrote, in a Foreign Affairs article titled "Decline and Fall?" that "The Russian Federation may be falling apartand its war against Chechnya is showing why."
So here's the awful reality: Russia won a war it was thought impossible to win, even by Newsweek's own calculations; and America lost a war it was thought impossible to lose. What a ****ing bummer.



The authors follow that up with this strange bit of evidence: "India has bought more Russian tanks since 2001 than the Russian Army." India, with a population almost 10 times that of Russia, has fought a series of major wars with neighbors China and Pakistan, with whom it has major territorial disputes. Russia's biggest threat comes from guerrilla insurgency campaigns. Why the **** would Russia buy more tanks than India, unless it planned to do something as idiotic as America and run around invading other countries? For which tanks are eventually useless anyway... The sad truth is that, despite serious problems, Russia's military is on the ascendancy. And even Newsweek announces that on its cover: "Putin's Hollow Victory: He's Won The War in Chechnya, But At What Cost?"
Is that supposed to be a put-down? My god, what any American would give, what George Bush would give, to win a "hollow victory" in Iraq! At literally any cost! Give us a "hollow victory" any day, and let us rue the consequences. Anything but this horrible failure and defeat, please!
Pulling back, we have to ask, "Why did Newsweek publish this? Why does a story like this resonate with its readers?" The reason, again, is simple: Newsweek's middlebrow Western/American readers desperately need to believe that Russia's military is a joke, the joke that it used to be. Because, well, as it turns out, America--you know, the "hyperpower," the most powerful empire in the history of mankind? 'member?-- welp, turns out that America can't even manhandle a few restive dust monkeys. The wars America thinks it won...it actually lost. And the war that Russia should have lost....according to Newsweek, has been "won."
Nothing could gall a nation of Bible-thumping, pious militarists more than this awful picture of opposing trajectories, America's pointing downward. Yet it's fitting: America thought they'd beaten the Taliban, and now they're back; thought they'd conducted an historical invasion/occupation of Iraq, and now they're getting their asses ground down; and thought they'd defeated Russia with the Cold War, only to see Russia rejecting the US, and worst of all, acting "confident."
Then there's the economy. We hate to think that Russia has been growing against all of our advice and help, which is why we desperately want and need to believe that whatever the case about Russia's booming economy, Russia had nothing to do with it: "What happens when--not if--oil and gas prices begin to retreat?" the authors posit, sticking their tongues out at Mother Russia.
Note the glee and hope in the sentence: "when--not if." Yeah, what happens then, huh?! Hey, I'm talkin' to you! I said, what happens then?! You're gonna be REALLY poor again, Russia, that's what'll happen. And you're gonna come runnin' back to us, America, for help. But this time, we may not be there for yuh! Think about that, Russia! Cuz even if you don't think about it, we in America will.
* * *
It's that pathetic. America really has fallen that hard and that fast. From the not-so-long-ago Golden Days of triumphalist Russia-bashing, to today's dumped-ex-girlfriend whining that Russia ain't shee-yit, and someday they'll need us again.
Folks, we have truly gone from the world's bitch-slappers to the world's bitch-niggaz.
And it all happened so quickly. If you google your way back in time a few years, to that Golden Age between early 2002 and the summer of 2003, you'd find a slew of insane articles describing America as, in the words of Newsweek, "the most powerful country in the history of the world." Or as best-selling historian Niall Ferguson argued, "The most powerful empire the world has ever seen." One winces when reading an article in the Washington Post from a couple of years ago, quoting neocon uberfag William Kristol boasting, "What's the point of being the greatest, most powerful nation in the world and not having an imperial role?" And no one around to smack him with a wet fish. Or a cold tire iron.
But what the hell am I saying, expecting Americans to have learned a lesson from their recent disasters and failures? I keep hearing from American friends that somehow "America is going to come to its senses" and "finally learn a lesson" because, hell, "we've lost the war." Wrong.
There's an antidote to learning lessons from harsh reality. Complete mass insane stupidity, combined with utter shamelessness. Kristol has absolutely no shame whatsoever for having led his country down the shithole to pursue his nerdoid imperial fantasies. He's been all over the airwaves lately, looking and talking all confident-like, first calling on America to support Israel's doomed war in Lebanon...and when that war went so well for Israel, Kristol was back bigger than ever, fresh from total defeat, calling for Bush to attack Iran. "Why wait?" he asked. I don't mean that paraphrasingly-like--Kristol actually used the "why wait" argument in an editorial in July. I'll quote it: "For that matter, we might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait?" Yeah, because heck, what's the point of being the most powerful nation in the world if you can't invade Iran on your own time schedule, and not someone else's?
The kicker here is that not only has Kristol NOT been pulled out of his mansion and had his head shaven by angry Americans, but rather, he speaks their language! This is where, unless you're lying to yourself, anyone who's trying to understand America needs to look. Past Kristol, past the editorial offices and think tanks in coastal America, and into its rank, mean, stupid heart. In a poll released earlier this week, Bush's approval rating has soared--SOARED!-- to 44%, the highest in ages. Even more shocking, Americans no longer believe that the war in Iraq was a mistake. The Bertrand Russell theorem applies to us too: we're getting what we deserve.
When I read that poll this past Monday, I exploded in laughter. The absolute, pure gullibility of the American public is without limit, bottomless...Everyone was asking last week "Why do they hate us?" all over again.
What a silly question! I mean, what's not to hate?! I hate us! We hate us! Anyone in his right mind would hate us!
The Republicans have thoroughly skull-****ed America, but the suckers are squealing for more! The denial has reached new, hemorrhage-fever dimensions, exemplified in, for example, a recent US News and World Report cover with an American soldier and the headline: "The Battle For Baghdad: For U.S. Troops, this may be the last chance to head off a full-blown civil war. There's a plan, but will it work?"
Duh, gee George, I dunno if it'll work, doyee! It's only been 3-1/2 years, George. Duh, you think we can pull it off, doyee? Like Joe Montana, huh George? Boy, that's a toughee! Gimme a minute to scratch my balls, George... Doyeee...I'm the American public, and I just need ta scratch my balls, and then I'll give you my opinion... doyeeeee...
I can't help it, suddenly I find Americans not merely contemptible but also funny as hell, I mean if you imagine them as literary characters. Because even in the world of fiction, you couldn't possibly invent a nation of such grotesque, abject suckers if you tried. For one thing, it wouldn't sell. No one would buy it. If the American public were characters in a novel, no editor would let them pass without massive reworking: "Your American public are simply not believable. They're too stupid and credulous and predictable...not to mention completely unlikable...no reader will identify with them! You can only suspend reader belief so much! Fiction has its limits!"
* * *
This is the essence of the Newsweek article, and so many others like it. While annoying, what they really reflect is something much more disturbing (or funny, depending on your tastes): the sharp and savage decline of American power, and with it, America's self-confidence. What's left are festering new complexes.
Indeed, as I said, it's Russia's confidence that galls the most.

"On the wider global stage, Putin displays seeming strength and new confidence," the Newsweek article notes. And then there's the "but"--a pretty funny "but," in fact--because the authors claim that Russian confidence is not merely misplaced, but that it is leading to racial violence and could plunge the region into chaos, while at the same time increasing Russia's weakness. I swear I'm not making this kitchen-sink-of-evils up: "However much it resonates with a particular Russian political class, that [confident] rhetoric can itself breed weakness. You see this in the sharp rise of race-related hate crimes in Russia..."
There is no logic from A to B, but then again, there is no logic to A: Bush destroys American power while enriching his plutocrat donors, and so therefore B: the nation supports him and his party over and over again.
Perhaps an even sadder example of America's syphilitic decline comes from the Washington Post's Jim Hoagland. In a column published the same day as the Newsweek issue, he made this incredible, jaw-dropping claim:
"An ambitious American effort to spread democracy into Russia under President Bill Clinton in the 1990s faltered and was stalemated when Putin came to power. But seen from today, it did help create a reference point and toehold for future advances. This should offer some solace to Clinton, and perhaps for President Bush's beleaguered push for democracy in the Middle East as well."
If I go into every reason why Hoagland is talking Holocaust-denial nonsense here, my article will be even more unnecessarily long than it is. So I'll be brief: Russians themselves fought to instill democracy into their country in the late perestroika/early-Yeltsin years. The first huge blow to democracy came when Yeltsin destroyed the opposition parliament with tanks--with full support from newly-elected President Clinton. The next blow to democracy came from the creation of an oligarchy and the mass impoverishment of Russia, all due to economic policies that came straight out of the US Treasury Department. The last big blow came in 1996, when the once-free Russian media was coapted by the pro-government oligarchy. The media in turn was used to support Yeltsin's presidential run that year--which he lost, but which he stole with massive manipulation, with the help and support and cover of the Clinton Administration.
By the time of the economic collapse in 1998, democracy had become known as "shit-ocracy," a dirty word and a cruel joke. The Clinton Administration sacrificed every decent value here, starting with the concept of democracy, in order to both enrich their backers on Wall Street and to make sure that the Communists didn't return to power, whether the Russians wanted them or not.
That is America's legacy here.
But we need to feel good about ourselves. That's what Hoagland's soothing message is: "Yes, Russia is entering the darkness of authoritarianism as it slips out of our orbit, but hey, it's not our fault, and moreover, there's a little bit of yearning for democracy left, and that's all thanks to us! So smile, reader! I'm smilin'!"
So this, it seems, is how America is dealing with its horrific case of cognitive dissonance: rewriting the recent past to cast themselves as a force of good and light when in fact we ****ed the whole thing up horribly, relieving what should be a guilty conscience (but isn't--don't be fooled, Americans know only fear, not remorse); and even more desperate attempts to rewrite the unbearable present tense, to deny our own weakness and decline by projecting it on others whom we think SHOULD be weaker. Russia, again, is the fall guy.
Nothing speaks more clearly of the total decline of America than this: Russia going from its former role as punching bag which the Western media would smack around to celebrate its own triumph and superiority...to today's anti-creation, in which every cheap rhetorical weapon is employed to ward off having to face the reality of a resurgent Russia. It's like the old Hollywood adage about success, only now applied at the national level, and it's a lesson we didn't learn: as much as we enjoyed dissing Russia on our way up to hyperpower stardom, today we can't cope with passing by Russia--now ascendant, confident-- as we freefall down to god knows where.

WebErr
September 27th, 2006, 10:44 AM
Last article written by American, who living in Russia and know where is it and what going here.

Ninjahedge
September 28th, 2006, 09:54 AM
Web, my advice to you is simple:


1. Don't read anything posted by Jake, he only wants to argue.

2. Do not get so defensive about everything. All governments make mistakes, but people who are not willing to look beyond gross titles like "americans" or "Russians" and blame all for what some do are only starting fights.

3. Read a bit more about some of the conflicts that you are talking about from sources that are not trying to blame OR defend the actions. You seem to be reading a ot of what you have been given, like saying that there was no civilian death in Chechnya.

4. Come back after you have done these things and we will have discussions with you about it. Right now you seem to be angry and yelling at us about a bunch of things you are reading, probably out of context, and associating any credibility for criticism of your country to the lack of credibility of our current leaders. That attitude is what started, and kept the cold war running.


So relax, read a bit more, and don't let your emotions get the best of you. You might learn a lot of stuff, good and bad, about your country, ours, and others.

In order to see where things lie in the world, you need more than one perspective.

Ninjahedge
September 28th, 2006, 09:58 AM
We always gave 3 hours for peaceful people before bombing, it's fact. After we destroying target if target is dangerous. After attack and clearing subterrain bunkers. Grozny was a fortress of terrorists and Chechen nationalists where each window hides the death for many Russian soldiers. It is war, isn't it? By the way, we was not so cruel with peaceful people like you in Iraq!

Case in point.

Your statement there reads just like what Bush was telling us about Baghdad.

"Evil is there!!! We gave them 3 whole hours to get out!!!"

You realize, of course, that giving warning like that usually only lets the "bad guys" get away. You think you can get your entire family out of a city in 3 hours? All your important belongings?

Your statement does not refute the death of civilians, it only tries to justify it.

Ninjahedge
September 28th, 2006, 10:00 AM
PS, your observation about the media is also true for the US.

Movies here are only interested in making money. There are very few that are really worth watching....

:(

Gregory Tenenbaum
September 29th, 2006, 06:28 AM
Exactly right.

And for your viewing pleasure heres the fantastic Ekranoplan Ground Effect Vehicle!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6HQSNERadQ

WebErr
September 30th, 2006, 05:00 AM
-> Ninjahedge
Don't worry about me, and thank you for understand me.
Your newsparers is ....................
I did not said "Russia is not weak", I just say "What nonsence your Newsweek is".
I trying to be cold, but IT was written about my country...
Chechnya was territory os terrorists, now it is place, where you can live.

About money... In USSR we didn't thinking about money and this was not so bad. Now we take a freedom, but criminal rising up, US trade giants buy so many our factory and now, when we can stand up, your White House said: "You have a wrong democracy, go back to the Yeltsyn chaos!"
I know, your "democracy idea" already stand a religion of politicans and reason for the war and military interventions. But ask yourself: what kind of democracy in your country?

We have too many problem inside Russia, we do not want to have any problem outside. Please help us to fill ensurance in the day of tommorow.

Thanks, always your friend, Vladimir, communist and weak Russian.

musicial
September 30th, 2006, 08:35 AM
webErr, it seems to me you are personalizing the general political problems. we are here to supply unbaised information to each other. As far as I understand you try to share your ideas with us but in a biased manner. The science of pyschology says that if someone or a state lacks of something, this person or state can use this lackness automatically to accuse the others of being lacked of this to coumlage his lackness. I mean if russians as a society hates some nations then russians can say that other nations such as USA hate russian. I can also give you a tipp in this respect. be careful and do not believe everything what you see or read.

I meet lots of young russians who hates other nations and who have prejudices for other nations. then what I thought was that there is a problem in this country's education system or there does exist a media problem in this country or something else.

Russia is still not a country as you defend here. As a person you can be in other way. that is something else. but russia is not in that way, is not so much peaceful country. Personally I do not hate Russia but I do not have a sympathy for Russia, too. Chechenians for example is other nation but you defend russian invasion of chechnya! what is that.!? things are not like you know. you do not know about the history. Russia has also made cultural exposure to other nations in central asia with military force. if I extend some questions to you starting with "why", probably you defend everything too... Since so many hundreds Russia has extended to Turkish territories. Normally Russia is not a nation which has coast in black sea. Now it has. How do you explain this!? I am not questioning to you that is why you do not need to give an answer. but what I say to you is that without knowing about history and other related sciences, defending something brings nothing but discussions and aggression and the most things you say here is not in reality as the things you know or think. stay cool:)

WebErr
October 2nd, 2006, 02:11 AM
Well, musical, how can you explain that facts: you living in USA, part of North America where was live no one of British or Chinies, or Afro, or Russian, or Latin, or... :) Now they are... You are American. Where is Indian, native nation (?) of America. That is History. History never understand words "if", "or", "else". Chechnya stand a part of Russia too many years ago. By the way we not kill them, like American kill almost every Indian. :)

"Never forget: Ivan is your enemy!" Are you still in the Cold War?

About the 'hate'. I am a child of three nations: Russian, Azerbajan and Ukrainian (5/8, 1/4, 1/8). If I will hate not Russian nations, then I will shot myself. :)

We are the same.

And by the way, do not thinking about Russia by the several Russians living in America. Believe me, it is not the index.

P.S. And please, correct my bad English.

Schadenfrau
October 2nd, 2006, 10:51 AM
Stop it with the navel-gazing, WebErr.

MrSpice
October 2nd, 2006, 05:43 PM
J. Bush and D. Cheney! Why they elected twice? It's impossible! They are not so smart for ruling your great country! Really! Why you elect them??? We are not the same like in USA too. We are polynational country, where living people of so many cultures. It is inherited from USSR. Why Bush say about V. Lenin: it is evil genious like Gitler and Ben Laden. Lenin gave us as many as possible. It was better then Tzarism or Pseudo-Democracy of 1914-1917.

The election in the US is a complex event and is based on many issues that you don't hear about abroad. I agree that the election of GW Bush is a puzzling event in many ways, but he was elected primarily because of the weak opposition and a very well organized republican party. In any case, the democracy in the US is very strong. Bush will be gone in a few years, as all presidents are. You are missing the point of the Newsweek article. Instead of kicking and screaming, you should read it again and think carefully. Russia is turning into a undemocratic theocracy. You can say all you want about GW Bush (and most people here would agree with you that we would be better off with another president), but at least we have hundreds of independent TV channels here in the US and free press.

I speak Russian and watch Russian TV once in a while (my parents watch 5 channnels of Russian TV all day) and the news programs looks like it was produced in the 80s. Putin has become the king. Somehow, people don't seem to mind that he and his cronies now control most of Russia's precious natural resources. I guess it's OK with you that they spend your money in Monte Carlo. Good luck!

bobrik
October 2nd, 2006, 07:13 PM
You will be surprised... But many in Russia consider that America not the democratic country.
I agree that today the Russian press reminds press of the beginning of 80 years... Then the press was engaged in protection of interests of the own country, instead of another's. And now this press shows opinion of the majority Russian.
I believe that the USSR was disorganized from for that that in the USSR could not read internal American press.

bobrik
October 2nd, 2006, 08:28 PM
Excuse me. And it is the truth, that during the Caribbean crisis. Americans swept away from counters a meal, and some especially politically mature, dug to themselves bombproof shelters? I frequently saw it in your films but I can not believe... :confused:

lofter1
October 2nd, 2006, 08:41 PM
Not sure that they were "politically mature" but when I was growing up some nearby neighbors of mine dug a hole in their backyard and built an underground shelter -- just in case the big nukes started flying.

It looked something like this ...

http://www.nyupress.org/images/0814775233.gif

http://www.nyupress.org/books/One_Nation_Underground-products_id-2519.html

bobrik
October 2nd, 2006, 08:56 PM
I was very much surprised and the beginnings to ask about it those who remembers. My grandfather Too was very much surprised and has told that in the USSR all knew all about these events and discussed it on work and came to a conclusion. They have decided what operate a nuclear board could to put only clever serious people And such people when will not begin nuclear war. They trusted to the Russia and the main thing trusted Americans. Then my grandfather has thought and has added... With What we were idiotsForgive for my English....

lofter1
October 2nd, 2006, 09:44 PM
Yes there were many idiots on both sides.

Hopefully we have learned a lesson.

But many people in power seem to have very short memories or want to re-write history -- neither of which are good patterns of thought for those who lead us.

WebErr
October 3rd, 2006, 02:16 AM
Nuclear bombs again. Can you thinking about something else?

2 MrSpice

Please, you make me smile...

If you read American newspaper and read Russian newspaper you will see only two propaganda style. We have more democratic lows and orders then you, but Russians thinking in old Soviet style. It is not "good" or "bad", it "is". :)

Putin is not a king, he try to splice two reality, Democratic and Socialistic, in one united Democratic idea. Do not push to Russia and you will see the best democracy in result with the best economy. Of cource after great America. ;)

About Bush and Cheney - they are too dangerous and not smart to rule you superstrong country.


P.S. My apologizes was about my bad Russian-English translate, I making too much errors in translatting, because Russian language is very strong for translation to English language.

MrSpice
October 3rd, 2006, 11:01 AM
Nuclear bombs again. Can you thinking about something else?

2 MrSpice

Please, you make me smile...

If you read American newspaper and read Russian newspaper you will see only two propaganda style. We have more democratic lows and orders then you, but Russians thinking in old Soviet style. It is not "good" or "bad", it "is". :)


P.S. My apologizes was about my bad Russian-English translate, I making too much errors in translatting, because Russian language is very strong for translation to English language.

American newspapers and american TV networks are independent and privately owned. They can be biased in their own way - of course. But no one from the government controls them like it's done now in Russia. When I left Russia in 1995, if was poor but democratic. Today, it's more prosperous but much less democratic. I visited St Petersburg last summer for the first time in 10 years. Once you step away 100 meters from the main avenue (Nevski Prospect), you see dirt and poverty. And the number of drunk and other people that look like they have no prospects and no hope is huge. I don't think you can find any other country where one has to register and has to carry all original documents with him/her in case police asks for it. And god forbid you lost the visa, you cannot leave the country. Russia has a very long way to go before it can even be compared with the US or any other democratic country.

bobrik
October 3rd, 2006, 04:15 PM
Basically do not love America and support Putin these are people which have a network. Five more years back was much less freedom and rights. Always it was possible to shout about the rights but but to you at all did not listen. Five ten years back salaries did not pay in general... I remember as we the whole year guzzled one macaroni without a sauce. And now our small town rises. In Russia on the central channels show euronews and it is full of channels (for example RENTV) which frankly water the president with a dirty.
In the USSR people when did not count Americans enemies. It is the truth. Threw mud at capitalists, imperialists of the government, but not peoples. Many at all did not know that America consists in NATO... It was not interesting to them. And cultural viewings of the antiAmerican propagation in army was not. And in your films it constantly show. :(

bobrik
October 3rd, 2006, 04:19 PM
I always would like to find out, how at you there people head over heels live? :confused: The head likely hurts callouses on ears? :eek: And in general likely it is unhealthy! Give to us speak the first snow tomorrow can drop out! :D

bobrik
October 3rd, 2006, 04:46 PM
lofter1

The word "idiot" on Russian is interesting and on English sound equally. :o

bobrik
October 5th, 2006, 07:35 PM
About chtchna... In the ninetieth years in Russia there was a puppet government. The drunk president and puppets controlled by America. Your newspapers liked to be praised by it. Even now when these rats have expelled, America and Britain protects and refuse to give out some of them. Means, war in the south of Russia was conducted under the order of America. And at this time the American government, shouts about awful Russian soldiers and about human rights. This duplicity and propagation..:(

lofter1
October 5th, 2006, 08:17 PM
lofter1

The word "idiot" on Russian is interesting and on English sound equally. :o

идиот ???

How do you pronounce that?

lofter1
October 5th, 2006, 08:21 PM
Amazing ... we are just the same ;)

Gven the cyrillic alphabet ...
http://www.viahistoria.com/SilverHorde/research/images/Scripts/MongolCyrillic.gif

It seems that идиот = IDIOT exactly !!

***

bobrik
October 5th, 2006, 08:45 PM
It is fine, it ridiculously looks for the first time I see a transcription of our letters... Interestingly that it for ОО with points? You have the Russian keyboard?

lofter1
October 5th, 2006, 09:10 PM
No russian keyboard ... just GOOGLE ;)

I translated IDIOT into Russian HERE (http://www.online-translator.com/text.asp)

And found the cyrillic alphabet HERE (http://www.viahistoria.com/SilverHorde/research/images/Scripts/MongolCyrillic.gif) ( main page HERE (http://www.viahistoria.com/SilverHorde/main.html?research/MongolScripts.html) :: there scroll at left down to "CULTURE" and click on >> Mongol Scripts then down the page to >> Cyrillic << << )

Lots of great stuff there, including ( no wonder we can't get along ) ...


http://www.viahistoria.com/SilverHorde/research/images/Scripts/WritingSystemsEvolution.gif

bobrik
October 6th, 2006, 08:40 PM
Strange, (English latin) I always thought that Russian stands closer to latin. They in general are similar.
I try English to learn... Has come here to esteem and argue, the truth badly turns out. English easy but to write on it, it is simply impossible, you should kill that who your grammar has thought up. :mad: Speak that on English study to read only in 8 - 9 years, it is the truth? :confused:

lofter And than in general at you people are engaged, there on other side of a planet? I heard, that as if for you work too, meet and get divorced. But as that is not so trusted... :D We collect cabbage, we wait winter... And than you there are engaged? :o

bobrik
October 6th, 2006, 08:47 PM
Beautiful sites... :cool:

lofter1
October 6th, 2006, 11:23 PM
Collecting cabbage ... that might be something we Americans will have to learn to do ;)

lofter1
October 8th, 2006, 10:00 AM
Outspoken Putin critic shot dead in Moscow

http://imgfarm.com/images/reuters/full/2006-10-07T210003Z_01_NOOTR_RTRIDSP_3_NEWS-RUSSIA-MURDER-DC.jpg
REUTERS/Alexander Natruskin/File
Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya speaks at a news conference
in Moscow in this February 27, 2001, file photograph.
Politkovskaya, an outspoken critic of President Vladimir Putin, was shot dead
on Saturday at her apartment block in central Moscow, police said.

reuters.myway.com (http://reuters.myway.com/article/20061007/2006-10-07T205727Z_01_L0763562_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-RUSSIA-MURDER-DC.html)
By James Kilner
October 7, 2006

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, an outspoken critic of President Vladimir Putin, was shot dead on Saturday at her apartment block in central Moscow, police said.

"According to initial information she was killed by two shots when leaving the lift. Neighbors found her body," a police source told Reuters. Police found a pistol and four rounds in the lift.

Politkovskaya, a 48-year-old mother of two, won international fame and numerous prizes for her dogged pursuit of rights abuses by Putin's government, particularly in the violent southern province of Chechnya.

"The first thing that comes to mind is that Anna was killed for her professional activities. We don't see any other motive for this terrible crime," said Vitaly Yaroshevsky, a deputy editor of the newspaper where Politkovskaya worked.

Moscow chief prosecutor Yuri Syomin told reporters at the crime scene, a nine-story Soviet-era apartment building in central Moscow, that he was treating the death as murder.

Paramedics took Politkovskaya's body, wrapped in a white sheet, out of the building and put it into an ambulance. A middle-aged woman laid flowers at the doors of the building and stood with her head against the wall, crying.

Politkovskaya's silver Lada, filled with supermarket shopping bags, was parked outside the apartment block.

Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, a shareholder in Politkovskaya's newspaper Novaya Gazeta, called the killing a "savage crime."

"It is a blow to the entire democratic, independent press," Gorbachev told Interfax news agency. "It is a grave crime against the country, against all of us."

In the days before her death, Politkovskaya had been working on a story about torture in Chechnya, which was expected to be published on Monday, her newspaper said.

DISTRUSTED PUTIN

The rebel province has been a constant headache for the Kremlin. Russia sent troops in 1994 to crush an insurgency but after 12 years of bloodshed and the devastation of the province's capital Grozny, sporadic attacks continue.

Politkovskaya was a fierce critic of Putin, whom she accused of stifling freedom and failing to shake off his past as a KGB agent.

"I dislike him for ... his cynicism, for his racism, for his lies ... for the massacre of the innocents which went on throughout his first term as president," she wrote in her book "Putin's Russia" which was published overseas but not in Russia.

Her death came on the day Putin turned 54.

In New York, the Committee to Protect Journalists described Politkovskaya's murder as a "devastating development for journalism in Russia."

There are few independent voices in Russian media, most of it controlled by the state or business interests. Newspapers such as Novaya Gazeta, popular with Russian liberals and human rights activists, are rare, especially outside the big cities and tend to have a small circulation.

"Ms. Politkovskaya's murder signals a major crisis of free expression and journalistic safety in Russia," said Thomas Hammarberg, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Rights group Amnesty International said in a statement it believed Politkovskaya was targeted because she reported on rights abuses in Russia and urged a thorough murder probe.

Born to Soviet Ukrainian diplomats in New York in 1958, Politkovskaya studied journalism at Moscow's State University and began her career in state media.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union she began working at the independent media which began to flourish under Gorbachev.

Politkovskaya's war reporting often meant she was under scrutiny by Russian politicians and, sometimes, the security services. She had been arrested and held in a pit for three days in Chechnya and received numerous death threats.

She said she was unable to cover the bloody siege of a school at Beslan in 2004 -- in which more than 330 children and parents died when troops stormed the school -- because she was poisoned on the flight from Moscow and ended up in hospital.

Her murder is the most high-profile killing of a journalist here since the death of U.S. journalist Paul Klebnikov in 2004.

Last month, gunmen shot and killed senior Russian central banker Andrei Kozlov in one of the most high profile contract killings since Putin came to power in 2000.

(Additional reporting by Robin Paxton, Tatyana Ustinova in Moscow and Bill Trott in Washington)

Copyright 2006 Reuters. / © 2006 IAC Search & Media.

GrandpaLenin
October 8th, 2006, 10:35 AM
The excellent example of the "Free" USA press. Sea of liberty , but identical contents and interpretation ;-)

On my glance presently USA much powerfully remind the SOVIET UNION in his(its) the most worst manifestations.

ablarc
October 8th, 2006, 11:22 AM
^ I don't get your point.

ZippyTheChimp
October 8th, 2006, 11:37 AM
I don't either.

I wonder if GrandpaLenin realizes that Reuters is headquartered in Britian.

lofter1
October 8th, 2006, 01:38 PM
I understand something (I think) although probably not with the same meaning as that of GrandpaLenin ...

From the point of view of those in power: If one is a patriot then one is not to criticize US policies / involvement in Iraq, just as one is not to question / criticize Russian policies / involvement in Chechnya.

... Politkovskaya was a fierce critic of Putin, whom she accused of stifling freedom and failing to shake off his past as a KGB agent.

"I dislike him for ... his cynicism, for his racism, for his lies ... for the massacre of the innocents which went on throughout his first term as president ... "
Although, to be fair (or perhaps naive): We haven't started shooting our journalists -- at least as far as I know (or maybe just not on our own soil).

Perhaps things on this side are just more "sophisticated" -- and better ways are known to help maintain the silence.

GrandpaLenin
October 8th, 2006, 01:53 PM
I wonder if GrandpaLenin realizes that Reuters is headquartered in Britian.

The Britain? This so in which premier poodle of the Bush?;-)

Articles in WP , WSJ , NYT etc. do not differ

ablarc
October 8th, 2006, 01:55 PM
Perhaps things on this side are just more "sophisticated" -- and better ways are known to help maintain the silence.
Aw g'wan, there isn't that much silence hereabouts; just look at your own posts for evidence.

It's a question of degree, and there's a big gap that separates us from Putin's Russia.

Or has someone knocked on your door recently?

Watch out when you get off the elevator. ;)

ablarc
October 8th, 2006, 06:26 PM
Articles in WP , WSJ , NYT etc. do not differ
Maybe the truth doesnt either.

bobrik
October 8th, 2006, 06:41 PM
Likely she was beaten by admirers. Half Russian which read foreign press, dreamed to make it. Right in Russia have only 2-3 percents of voices. Because it is impossible to write in foreign press of muck about the own country. :(

johnnypd
October 8th, 2006, 06:45 PM
i wish i could read russian. i tried to babelfish a shklovsky essay, came out a bit stranger than even he would've liked. ;)

bobrik
October 8th, 2006, 07:18 PM
On on Russian it is easy to read... But language, I think, for Americans is difficult.
So the truth that in USA study to read with 7 - 8 years? :confused:
Not simply letters and normally books... ????

ablarc
October 8th, 2006, 07:48 PM
Definitely a language barrier here somewhere,



MrSpice? ...Are you there, MrSpice?

bobrik
October 8th, 2006, 08:42 PM
Normally do not want to answer, likely hesitate.
And I here am tormented, I write..

bobrik
October 8th, 2006, 08:49 PM
Unless it is difficult to help for me to destroy stereotypes? I have normally asked........

milleniumcab
October 8th, 2006, 08:52 PM
Unless it is difficult to help for me to destroy stereotypes? I have normally asked........

Ignorance breeds stereotyping.. Wright or wrong, this is Human Nature...

lofter1
October 8th, 2006, 09:28 PM
... has someone knocked on your door recently?

No, but I'm certain they've put me on the "list" ;)




Watch out when you get off the elevator.

If that happens both my attorney and my sister have the name of the guy to give to the police ...

ablarc
October 8th, 2006, 09:35 PM
No, but I'm certain they've put me on the "list" ;)
Uh oh, I'm gonna have to watch who I hang with.

lofter, it's been nice knowing you, but...

WebErr
October 9th, 2006, 01:29 AM
Oh, my...
Putin killing everyone of journalists... :D
If someone of journalists killed in Russia - Putin make it. Forget it, it would be stupid step for the President. ;)

By the way: GEORGIUA it is NOT only STATE of AMERICA ! ! !
GEORGIA IS IN-DER-PEN-DENT COUNTRY ! ! !

IN THE NORTH OF KAVKAZ ! ! !

WAKE UP AND START LEARNING ! ! ! ! !

P.S. I see euronews this morning. Yesturday I listen 1st Channel of Russia.
I said: we have a FREE press. News are the same.

Ninjahedge
October 9th, 2006, 09:15 AM
Oh, my...
Putin killing everyone of journalists... :D

Sometimes an accusation is not a condemnation.

In other words, saying you suspect someone is not saying you have proof. You can speculate here.

What I think might be the case is that she "offended" some of the people who stand to lose a lot of money if she kept digging up all this bad stuff. I think they also might have done it on Putin's birthday as a message to him to remember who his connections are.

Just a guess.


If someone of journalists killed in Russia - Putin make it. Forget it, it would be stupid step for the President. ;)

Yes, but that does not remove him entirely from suspicion. I do not think he would be stupid enough to do this directly, but this may have been a "favor".


By the way: GEORGIUA it is NOT only STATE of AMERICA ! ! !
GEORGIA IS IN-DER-PEN-DENT COUNTRY ! ! !

The word is "Independent". And we know this already.


IN THE NORTH OF KAVKAZ ! ! !

WAKE UP AND START LEARNING ! ! ! ! !

Stop shouting, and stop assuming we are all stupid. If you want to discuss things you are welcome to, but this is not a shouting match.


P.S. I see euronews this morning. Yesturday I listen 1st Channel of Russia.
I said: we have a FREE press. News are the same.

No press is ever truly free. There are pressures from different sources in the government and the private sector.

We are starting to suffer, on some of our main-stream news sources a bias towards what people want to hear. Knowledge of what a sources bias is is always helpful in getting your bearings on the truth of the matter.

Stop saying that "news is free" and try to talk with us about this and we may be able to get a better understanding, on both sides, of what may actually be going on inside of Russia.

GrandpaLenin
October 9th, 2006, 01:32 PM
What I think might be the case is that she "offended" some of the people who stand to lose a lot of money if she kept digging up all this bad stuff.

Maybe she is killed by her political owners , because the main subject(Chechna) of her articles now not so popular as earlier.

But her murder has served the cause of the strong resonance in the press and beside politician.

So and see the article of the type: " Putin directly kills the journalist!" "Bloody regime in Russia" etc.

Apropos most of all, the journalists perishes in Iraq. I want believe that all of these perish from hands terrorists and not from hands CIA or USA army.


Yes, but that does not remove him entirely from suspicion. I do not think he would be stupid enough to do this directly, but this may have been a "favor".

Agree. But on my glance she too small fry to interest personally Putin.

bobrik
October 9th, 2006, 08:01 PM
Shortage of dialogue plants stereotypes.
----------------------
The western newsdealers have finished off her. To find a new theme.
-----------------------
the USSR was disorganized because to people did not allow to read internal American. Press. Now in Russia burst of the antiAmerican moods, from for that that people have received such opportunity.
------------------
It is interesting, if your newspapers write so much mucks about Russia, means there are many people which want to read about it?

bobrik
October 9th, 2006, 08:18 PM
Simply in Russia nobody can speak that Putin does(makes) that not correctly. Because it is possible to lose the rests of popularity. Also it is necessary to get support from Putin then your rating at once flies up. From this it seems that all press is supervised Putin

WebErr
October 10th, 2006, 03:24 AM
I reading press of both sides of propaganda barrier.
Here http://inosmi.ru I can read any interesting press. If you want, You can read comment of simple citizens of Russia after article. (If you can understand Russian language.) Politkovskaya wrote not interesting and not objective articles. She was not popular. It was a small figure - victim for Altar of Fighting with Putin. Exactly assasination make bad birthday for our President. He is not "bloody agent", it is simple human with feelings and honor, with open soul and realy honest man. We waiting that man too many years. And now our President does not suit USA and EU liders.Putin too strong in the world arena. It is dangerious for politican. Too many enemies...!


P.S. Check Alabama now... may be some "Russian Troops" digged under Pasific Ocean and now we occupate your South State.... you know... Georgia!.. :D

Ninjahedge
October 10th, 2006, 09:18 AM
Um, what are you going on about?

Paranoia over the russians faded in the early 90's.

The only people that still think this even exists are, ironically, the russians like yourself.

Web, try reading some of the other threads here and get an idea of who you are talking to before you continue to insult all of us.

Please?

lofter1
October 10th, 2006, 09:30 AM
Check Alabama now... may be some "Russian Troops" digged under Pasific Ocean and now we occupate your South State.... you know... Georgia!.. :D
Oh, nooooooooooo...

Video "must view" of the week:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/Russians_are_coming_the_russians_are_coming.jpg

The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Russians_Are_Coming,_the_Russians_Are_Coming) (1966)

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/russians_are_coming_the_russians_are_coming/

Ninjahedge
October 10th, 2006, 10:26 AM
"Russian Troops" digged under Pasific Ocean

Damn pacifists. There's a whole OCEAN of 'em now!

GrandpaLenin
October 10th, 2006, 03:18 PM
:-)

MrSpice
October 10th, 2006, 04:14 PM
The excellent example of the "Free" USA press. Sea of liberty , but identical contents and interpretation ;-)

On my glance presently USA much powerfully remind the SOVIET UNION in his(its) the most worst manifestations.

If you really think that the US press is like the Soviet press or close to it, you're simply mistaken and have no clue what you're talking about. Reuters is a well-respected news agency based in Britain. The reason why you see the same kind of analysis in the US newspapers is very simple: because it's logical. It makes sense to assume that Putin would benefit from this kind of action since Putin has been concentrating political and economic power in his hands in the past few years (virtual control of the whole parliament, total control of Russian television, total control of oil and gas industry, etc.)

I don't think there's any evidence yet to suggest that the mightly and powerful russian government was involved. However, Putin has made his career as a KGB operative. A significant portion of new Russian wealth was built on voiolence and corruption. Methods like this one have been used in the Soviet times. It's not that far-fetched.

bobrik
October 10th, 2006, 07:14 PM
I saw this film, it is remarkable.
---------------------------------------------
You will be surprised, but in Russia many people are proud of KGB.
----------------------
The press of USA reflects the American economic interests. If the truth prevents these interests the worse for the truth. :(

bobrik
October 10th, 2006, 07:30 PM
In the USSR people in the government were selected. In the USSR people lived completely not badly. In the USSR there were such privileges which was not dreamed in America. The creative intelligency itself oppressed each other. IT was not KGB. Simply the market is not present, how will decide whom to print? Acquaintances. Corporations offer you two candidates, one will be at war for democracy, another for increase of influence. Choose. And all democracy. :cool:

WebErr
October 11th, 2006, 02:12 AM
If you really think that the US press is like the Soviet press or close to it, you're simply mistaken and have no clue what you're talking about. Reuters is a well-respected news agency based in Britain. The reason why you see the same kind of analysis in the US newspapers is very simple: because it's logical. It makes sense to assume that Putin would benefit from this kind of action since Putin has been concentrating political and economic power in his hands in the past few years (virtual control of the whole parliament, total control of Russian television, total control of oil and gas industry, etc.)

I don't think there's any evidence yet to suggest that the mightly and powerful russian government was involved. However, Putin has made his career as a KGB operative. A significant portion of new Russian wealth was built on voiolence and corruption. Methods like this one have been used in the Soviet times. It's not that far-fetched.

What kind of USSR press... Where is USSR... ?
Putin is not a President of USSR...
USSR was a union of countries like Ukraine, Russia, Belorussia, Kazakhstan, Tojikiston, Latvia and... Georgia (without Atlanta).
We have a free Press, but nobody read anti-government propoganda, because there are not professional newsmakers and only "sensations" without facts, for this reason pro-governmental newspapers always have a good ratings - maximum news, minimum "sensations".

Ninjahedge
:)
Georgians in dangerous! Atlanta in dangerous! President of Georgia living in Atlanta, but capital of Georgia is Tbilisi... Oh... my... I can't find Atlanta in the map!.. Where is Georgia!.. Help us!.. Russians are coming...
http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=l&mid=&board=37138459&sid=37138459&tid=aprussiageorgia&start=1
:)

GrandpaLenin
October 11th, 2006, 04:58 AM
If you really think that the US press is like the Soviet press or close to it, you're simply mistaken and have no clue what you're talking about.


do not want be shown rough, but that you are aware of press of the Soveit Union? you read its although once? or you have a beliefs about its only from american press?



Reuters is a well-respected news agency based in Britain.


The whole problem that often well-respected west publishing write such belongings that for each person being in Russia obviously this lie. I not talk about autocrat Putin, condition democracy in Russia or than like.
Simply about home thing, which well known each russian. Like bread cost or percent of the hypothec.



The reason why you see the same kind of analysis in the US newspapers is very simple: because it's logical.


Maybe because their readers wait this?
On that that I see Cold War did not end



It makes sense to assume that Putin would benefit from this kind of action since Putin has been concentrating political and economic power in his hands in the past few years (virtual control of the whole parliament, total control of Russian television, total control of oil and gas industry, etc.)


Not only Putin would benefit from this kind of action. All Russia have benefit.
Putin approvals rating does not fall below 70% percent.

Becomes particularly sadly when west press expose Yelcsin as democrat,not wanting notice that Yelcsin corruption was much more strong than under Putin.



I don't think there's any evidence yet to suggest that the mightly and powerful russian government was involved. However, Putin has made his career as a KGB operative.


Again you in captivity stereotype created during cold war and similars successfully existing in USA hitherto.

In KGB apropos already after death Stalin do not torture the people, distinguish from modern CIA( military base on Cuba).
Or human rigths spread only for USA citizen? Look like this.



A significant portion of new Russian wealth was built on voiolence and corruption.


notwithstanding corruption



Methods like this one have been used in the Soviet times. It's not that far-fetched.


What you know about soveit times?, beside propaganda of Cold War?
Look like nothing.

MrSpice
October 11th, 2006, 10:02 AM
do not want be shown rough, but that you are aware of press of the Soveit Union? you read its although once? or you have a beliefs about its only from american press?

The whole problem that often well-respected west publishing write such belongings that for each person being in Russia obviously this lie. I not talk about autocrat Putin, condition democracy in Russia or than like.
Simply about home thing, which well known each russian. Like bread cost or percent of the hypothec.

Maybe because their readers wait this?
On that that I see Cold War did not end

Not only Putin would benefit from this kind of action. All Russia have benefit.
Putin approvals rating does not fall below 70% percent.

Becomes particularly sadly when west press expose Yelcsin as democrat,not wanting notice that Yelcsin corruption was much more strong than under Putin.

Again you in captivity stereotype created during cold war and similars successfully existing in USA hitherto.

In KGB apropos already after death Stalin do not torture the people, distinguish from modern CIA( military base on Cuba).
Or human rigths spread only for USA citizen? Look like this.

notwithstanding corruption

What you know about soveit times?, beside propaganda of Cold War?
Look like nothing.

First of all, I was born in St Petersburg, Russia and lived there for 21 years. SO - yes, I did read the Soviet press and watch Russian TV at times even now here in New York (my parents have 5 russian channels on their cable TV lineup). Before you start any kind of argument, make sure you write something people can understand. Even I cannot understand 80% of what you said above.

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 10:29 AM
Spice, be nice.

His english may be a little broken, but we have to give him that. His English is much better than most of our Russian.....

I do agree, however, that it is difficult to understand exactly what bobrik, weberr and Grandpa are saying here.

Gentlement, in order to understand you, you might want to try to keep your points simple and direct. You may be very smart people, but a LOT is getting lost in translation.

You may have noticed that Lofter1 and I have been soft-stepping around your comments because we realize your limitations, but coming in and c alling us what seems to be "stupid" in your posts is not very smart on your part.

Just be careful. ;)

MrSpice
October 11th, 2006, 10:39 AM
Spice, be nice.

His english may be a little broken, but we have to give him that. His English is much better than most of our Russian.....

I do agree, however, that it is difficult to understand exactly what bobrik, weberr and Grandpa are saying here.

Gentlement, in order to understand you, you might want to try to keep your points simple and direct. You may be very smart people, but a LOT is getting lost in translation.


I am keeping my points simple and direct and letting him know that no one understand what he's talking about. I don't think I was not being nice. If he is still learning the language, he should be sensitive about what he writes and what people can understand.

GrandpaLenin
October 11th, 2006, 10:42 AM
Если коротко, то то что пишет американская пресса с этой стороны выглядит как абсолютная чушь достойная разве что желтых газет.

К примеру о "популярной" журналистке Политковской. Популярная в узких кругах разве что.
Так понятнее?

Вполне возможно я переоценил свою способность писать на английском :-)

Schadenfrau
October 11th, 2006, 10:48 AM
Wow, Russian internet trolls. That's a new one.

WebErr
October 11th, 2006, 11:08 AM
Если коротко, то то что пишет американская пресса с этой стороны выглядит как абсолютная чушь достойная разве что желтых газет.

К примеру о "популярной" журналистке Политковской. Популярная в узких кругах разве что.
Так понятнее?

Вполне возможно я переоценил свою способность писать на английском :-)
Чел, ты меня поражаешь, я думал, что ты тоже американец... 8)
Но в целом, ты прав - сплошная пропаданда холодной войны!!! 8(

to All

Anyway, you understand us, we understand you, as well as possible in situation when the language stand a barrier to talking between smart people. If you have a questions, how we living in the "country where is no democracy", ask any questions. I swear, I will be honest when answer.

And please, no one revolution again, we just want to live in peace! 8)

P.S. About Politkovskaya. A read one of her articles once, that's only sh... bad article... She stand famous only after death.
May be she make this assasination? I will not surprised. Anyway she corrupt birthday of good man. 8\

ZippyTheChimp
October 11th, 2006, 11:09 AM
Grandpa Lenin: Rules of this forum specify English only. I am sorry if you are having problems communicating, but you will have to adjust.

As suggested, keep your points simple. Your attempts at clever analogy in English are difficult to understand.

ZippyTheChimp
October 11th, 2006, 11:16 AM
If you have a questions, how we living in the country where is no democracy, ask any questions.Since you began the topic, I have only one:

What do you mean by "Why you hate us?"

Who says we hate you? Actually, and you may find this insulting, but at the present time, conditions in Russia are a low priority among the American public, and this is reflected by the relatively low American press coverage.

It is not the same as the level of concern that existed during the Cold War.

GrandpaLenin
October 11th, 2006, 11:29 AM
I beg pardon if insult someone, even though forum rules

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 11:53 AM
Anyway, you understand us, we understand you, as well as possible in situation when the language stand a barrier to talking between smart people.

The problem is, we are NOT understanding the basic direction you are leading to. As zippy mentioned "Why you hate us" is not a good title to get a balanced talk about culture.


If you have a questions, how we living in the "country where is no democracy", ask any questions. I swear, I will be honest when answer.

Um, you are putting words we not say in our mouths. You are putting what you hear, what you THINK you hear on this board.

Your phrase there says, in our context, that we say that communism is bad and that we have no idea how anyone can live without democracy. That is biased and predudiced. That is stereotype of America and its people.

We are not saying that, we only question Putins motives and direction in the same way we question our own leaders.

Sadly, you defend your leader in the same way some of our people defend ours.

Us vs. Them.


And please, no one revolution again, we just want to live in peace! 8)

Here is a point of confusion.

Who revolution? Your people? The people on this board? Humor is appreciated, but is lost when meaning is not clear.


P.S. About Politkovskaya. A read one of her articles once, that's only sh... bad article... She stand famous only after death.

You read anything else by her? How you base your opinion? You think she was not good writer, or that you just disagree with her?


May be she make this assasination? I will not surprised. Anyway she corrupt birthday of good man. 8\

That is absolute nonsense. Saying she might have killed herself to make putin look bad and give herself fame? No.

"She" did not corrupt the birthday of anyone. If you were to be killed on someones birthday, would you like it if your comrades considered it a plot to ruin that persons birthday?

That is stupid suggestion. Please do not bend to that kind of arguement, it will not be met with good talk.

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 11:53 AM
I beg pardon if insult someone, even though forum rules

No insult with russian, but we have to keep some rules here.

WebErr
October 11th, 2006, 12:12 PM
Since you began the topic, I have only one:

What do you mean by "Why you hate us?"

Who says we hate you? Actually, and you may find this insulting, but at the present time, conditions in Russia are a low priority among the American public, and this is reflected by the relatively low American press coverage.

It is not the same as the level of concern that existed during the Cold War.
This topic starts after I read some articles in US and UK newspapers, where publicated some .... strange articles .... like "Russia is weak" or "Putin is spy " ....
Well, Russia is not so strong, but not exactly weak!
Putin is president, not a spy!
Show some respect... oh... forget it... I've already forget it...

When journalists running on for the sensations, they forget about any respect to simple people and to the country, where can not speak English and never read that articles. ( You know, we have not bad translators. And we always reading your press. Very usefully. Your articles in Russian language. 8) )


In another word, if you believe to newspaper articles, when you know why I start this topic. 8)

Always your,
Little Communist with big nuclear bomb in the pocket...
Vladimir (Not Putin, Not Spy, Just Russian).

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 12:27 PM
Actually Web, we have not gotten any of that in our papers any ime recently.

I think you are reading only what the powers that be WANT to translate. If all you hear is "Fox News" and you think that is what all americans are like, I can see your problem.

Try shows/channels like PBS or even "The Daily Show with John Stewart" to get a bit mor balanced, although in the case of the Daily Show, comedic view on all of this.

Although you may be dissapointed that we really REALLY do not talk much about Russia anymore.

WebErr
October 11th, 2006, 12:42 PM
The problem is, we are NOT understanding the basic direction you are leading to. As

zippy mentioned "Why you hate us" is not a good title to get a balanced talk about culture.

Answer in the last my post.


Um, you are putting words we not say in our mouths. You are putting what you hear,

what you THINK you hear on this board.

It was in th almost each newspaper of US and UK. Exactly your biggest companies want to have a control on

resources of my country.
It is a big game with a big bets.


Your phrase there says, in our context, that we say that communism is bad and that

we have no idea how anyone can live without democracy. That is biased and predudiced. That is stereotype of

America and its people.

Communism? It was idea, like democracy. In your orders we have the same disballance as in USSR.
Freedom and independence v.s. order and responsibility. Where is true? What is true?
You have idea, but idea must work!
In the U.S. only 2 parties. You have not any choice in election. Exacly election completing very strange. In result you have Bush and Cheney. You happy?


We are not saying that, we only question Putins motives and direction in the same way we question our own

leaders.

Sadly, you defend your leader in the same way some of our people defend ours.

Us vs. Them.

I think same.


Here is a point of confusion.

Who revolution? Your people? The people on this board? Humor is appreciated, but is lost when meaning is not

clear.

Did you forget Ukraine, Georgia (not State of America) and others... ?


You read anything else by her? How you base your opinion? You think she was not good writer, or that you just

disagree with her?

Yeah, it was awful. She write basically out of border. In Russia she have a very bad reputation.
"Novaya gazeta" where working Politkovskaya had very low ratings. But you can buy it in any place of Moscow, where is no free press... ;)



That is absolute nonsense. Saying she might have killed herself to make putin look bad and give herself fame? No.

"She" did not corrupt the birthday of anyone. If you were to be killed on someones birthday, would you like it if

your comrades considered it a plot to ruin that persons birthday?
That is stupid suggestion. Please do not bend to that kind of arguement, it will not be

met with good talk.
Forget it. I was not serious. Russian humour sometimes is very cruel.
Someone, who kill her had some targets. This assasination solve some tasks of that

man. It was not Putin - too small fly. It was not President of Chechnya - this is not the way of caucausian man. It

can be some really big figure in the World politic, who wants to start PR campaign about "bloody hands of Soviet

Spy Putin". In another words, the target of this assasination was You.



Actually Web, we have not gotten any of that in our papers any ime recently.

I think you are reading only what the powers that be WANT to translate. If all you hear is "Fox News" and you think that is what all americans are like, I can see your problem.

Try shows/channels like PBS or even "The Daily Show with John Stewart" to get a bit mor balanced, although in the case of the Daily Show, comedic view on all of this.

Although you may be dissapointed that we really REALLY do not talk much about Russia anymore.

I can read English. Thank you.
If you want, you can go to the
inosmi.ru
and check what kind of article there.
There is too much article from Polska, USA, France, China, UK and other. We reading Times, Newsweek, Guardians...
You can check anyway. Translation is correct. Article choice is wide.

bobrik
October 11th, 2006, 03:36 PM
I did not wish to shout. I tried to write itself and then to check in a word. But it is too difficult. And here I have seen that about us write such nonsense. I was indignant. I to translate began simply. I searched for cities. It is impossible to teach language without dialogue. Excuse me, I did not want to shout at people, yes with a bad pronunciation. :rolleyes:

bobrik
October 11th, 2006, 03:41 PM
mr Spice.
Думаю вы не правы...

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 03:56 PM
Guys, it might be better if you practiced dialogue (english) on a less important topic.

Try some casual talk first.

You will know more and be more comfortable with language AND with us. It will make things easier.

MrSpice
October 11th, 2006, 05:17 PM
Guys, it might be better if you practiced dialogue (english) on a less important topic.

Try some casual talk first.

You will know more and be more comfortable with language AND with us. It will make things easier.

What they say does not make sense in either language. They are trying to say that American press is just full of propanada, that they call Putin a spy, and that all that journalist that was killed was not popular, etc.

Well, I can read russian press on the web in Russian and I read the best newspapers we have in this town (Wall Street Journal and The New York Times). I think the US press covers Russia much better than these 2 people give us credit for. In general, there's very little interest in Russia in the US, so the news about Russia are rather difficult to find nowadays. Most educated Americans would probably say that Russia is a developing and relatively poor country that is quite corrupt and not very democratic. And that's the right assessment in my view.

bobrik
October 11th, 2006, 07:02 PM
Плевать США хотели на демократию. А Россия объединит под себя все добывающие страны и будет новый опек. А пресса США защищает интересы своей страны. Если для этого надо оправдать убийства или воровство они это делают. Потому что мир дерьмо и люди в нём плавают.
........

Guys excuse me. I do not want to argue. Please give me a good page. You should have good verses, stories in America? Give me please a page of the literature club a forum. I can not find anything normal. If it is not difficult for you...

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 07:13 PM
Rough translation:

To spit the USA wanted on democracy. And Russia will unite under itself all extracting countries and will be new opek. And the press of the USA protects interests of the country. If for this purpose it is necessary to justify murders or they it do larceny. Because the world dung and people in it float.



Um.....

To spit on the democracy that the US wanted. Russia will untite again under its own power and become the new OPEC. The US press protects the interests of the country it is in. For this purpose they will justify murder or larceny. Because the world is dung and people are floating in it?



I don't know, it does not sound too good there. Try not to post russian on here bud, you guys were told once. It is very discourteous. If you want to talk to MrSpice, you can private message him.

Ninjahedge
October 11th, 2006, 07:15 PM
Translator I used:

http://translation2.paralink.com/

bobrik
October 11th, 2006, 08:21 PM
First I think. Probably.

I have politeness. But I am simply tired to argue. Is silly to convince Americans to not be Americans. There are your interests and there are ours. Probably I want that America paid my sea tour. And you probably want it from Russia.

WebErr
October 12th, 2006, 01:29 AM
bobrik
Relax, guy. I make this topic not for expressive talking. It might be objective descussion between wise people. Their press writting about us not objective. We can explaine it to simple people.
And please, If you want to say something in Russian, try to message me before. I can help. Another way is translate by internet site. Like Ninjahedge done it.
Are You from yarportal.ru?

Ninjahedge
You are great translator. And you much smart. Are each New York citizen so educated?
Well, I'm impressed...
After all what I listen from simple American, who afraid Russian invasion in the State Georgia you are like a sun light through the cloudy sky.
Now you know some of the rule of Russian language. Perhaps you find English and Russian languages too different. It is. Each rule in English is too dificult to understand for the Russian speaker. Too different!..

Ninjahedge
October 12th, 2006, 09:20 AM
First I think. Probably.

I have politeness. But I am simply tired to argue. Is silly to convince Americans to not be Americans. There are your interests and there are ours. Probably I want that America paid my sea tour. And you probably want it from Russia.

Racist!

Geez man, you are doing exactly what we said not to.

"convince Americans to not be Americans".

What the hell do you mean by that? Is there something wrong with being American? I hope that is just another unintended implied meaning there, but this is another example of how saying something the wrong way can carry a different meaning than what was intended.

Now if you mean to say that all "Americans" are one certain way and it is fruitless to discuss anything with them because they are pig-headed, I suggest you leave immediately. You are being ignorant and obstinant yourself in saying that and you are not looking for a discussion.

Ninjahedge
October 12th, 2006, 09:27 AM
bobrik
Relax, guy. I make this topic not for expressive talking. It might be objective descussion between wise people. Their press writting about us not objective. We can explaine it to simple people.
And please, If you want to say something in Russian, try to message me before. I can help. Another way is translate by internet site. Like Ninjahedge done it.
Are You from yarportal.ru?

Appreciated Web. I hope you guys get a better picture of who we really are rather than how each of our newspapers portrays the other.


Ninjahedge
You are great translator. And you much smart. Are each New York citizen so educated?
Well, I'm impressed...
After all what I listen from simple American, who afraid Russian invasion in the State Georgia you are like a sun light through the cloudy sky.
Now you know some of the rule of Russian language. Perhaps you find English and Russian languages too different. It is. Each rule in English is too dificult to understand for the Russian speaker. Too different!..

Well, I have to admit that I used the web-translator and then tried to figure out what you meant. The hardest part is context. You can translate all of the words, but the meaning is sometimes lost.

One of the hardest things I have seen, and I see it a lot with some co-workers from all nations, is that word-order is different. Pronouns, subjects, verbs are all arranged differently in different languages. Understanding this helpd to know what the other is saying.

I have been trying to keep it simple, not because I think you are dumb, but rather because I know how hard it is to translate some things.

I hope you see this and are willing to just look around and learn a bit more about us here. You could also learn english and American Culture a bit better than just reading papers or watching TV. You would have contact with us.

I hope we can forget all this stupid fighting and learn a bit more about each others countries from the "inside".

MrSpice
October 12th, 2006, 10:12 AM
thing the wrong way can carry a different meaning than what was intended.

Now if you mean to say that all "Americans" are one certain way and it is fruitless to discuss anything with them because they are pig-headed, I suggest you leave immediately. You are being ignorant and obstinant yourself in saying that and you are not looking for a discussion.


Ninjahedge - don't you think that his ignorance was on display all along? I think those 2 loons give Russians a bad name. Sorry, I am going back to being nice :)

Ninjahedge
October 12th, 2006, 10:46 AM
Realistically? I do not know.

I do not know ho wto contexturalize their statements until I know a little more about them. If they are younger, then it is just lack of exposure, if they are older it may be a combination of lack of exposure AND an unwillingness to change that most people (no matter what country) exhibit as they get older.

I think Web is trying to come to terms with it, and Grandpa is not too bad. They just have their own misconceptions about the US and its press (which is not saying that they are not right about some venues being biased and innaccurate). Bobrik seems to be pised off about something. Saying humans are floating in crap and tying the comparisons to stupidity and fecal matter to Americans in general.

If he continues with that he should be asked to leave, but the other two seem to mean well enough. I hope bob learns how to "play nice" with the rest of us.

Lesson is, we should all be willing to learn and accept when our sources may not be correct. But we also have to refrain from generalizations and try not to place accusations on people or things when we really do not have anything substantial to back them up.

And we ALL have to seperate the individual from the political representation/perception of the whole. Bush is an arse, but 70%+ of us loved him at one time. The same can be said or denied about Putin, we will just have to see.

bobrik
October 12th, 2006, 09:23 PM
mr
If you really understand On Russian you know that I wanted to tell.
ni
I have told that silly to try to change each other.
Americans protect own interests. We protect own.
What for the children's manner at once to put stamps? It is hard for me to read your messages, But I do not name you "racist" Only because I can not understand.

mr_lover
October 12th, 2006, 10:24 PM
u talk to me
any way ijsut wana to say that war will not help u when u find urself without foood and ipromise u soooooooooooooooooon u will see

bobrik
October 12th, 2006, 10:50 PM
Is it possible, what between two ours world is such a big difference? I did told you simple thins and hoped what you will understand my. I am don’t want to arguing with anybody, it is not interesting for my. I’m did tell you what, ours countries will bi always have own political and economic interests. And it always wills bi arguing who has more rights to receive greater piece of a pie. And American’s press protecting American interests. If it will be necessary, the American’s press will bi shouting about infringements human’s liberty and protects thieves, and to praise tyrants.
(He is bad men but he is our men.)
AND I think that it is correctly. AND it good, that Russian’s press getting to do IT today to.
And it is silly disputing who is thru today. Do you understand mi?

WebErr
October 13th, 2006, 03:00 AM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I want to notify you about I don't know who is bobrik and GrandpaLenin, why they are here and what they talking about.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ninjahedge
Will see about Putin... will see...
I wish only the justice for my country. This is the reason of my coming here.
By the way, you have only one word 'Russian' for both simbols: nation and citizens. When I said Russian, I mean people, who living in Russia. We are polynational community.

MrSpice
I have just a few questions to You.
1. What is democracy?
2. What country have a democracy?
3. Are Bush is simbol of democracy?
4. Are USA is simbol of democracy?
5. Do You love your Motherland?
6. Do You objective in your oppinions?
7. Why in USA is two identic politic party: Democracy and Respublican (Demo-cracy and Res-publica have identic translation, as you know.)
Where is your another political party? Like Liberal, Social, Communistical, National, Party of Mothers, Party of Workers? Why only TWO party?
Why American people have a poor choice between democratic and respublican lider? Why? Is it democracy? Is it same as ONE Communistical party in USSR in 1918-1991? Tell me...

Miss India
October 13th, 2006, 01:37 PM
Ninjahedge - don't you think that his ignorance was on display all along? I think those 2 loons give Russians a bad name. Sorry, I am going back to being nice :)
I can very much see this from your point of veiw. Muslims everywhere are given a bad name because of what is shown in the media - and as a Muslim I have to try to explain what a tiny minority they really are.
It is really stupid to bunch them up together in the same boat.

lofter1
October 13th, 2006, 04:52 PM
Well, he wasn't ours .. and not on our soil ...




Although, to be fair (or perhaps naive):

We haven't started shooting our journalists -- at least as far as I know (or maybe just not on our own soil).

Coroner: U.S. Killed British TV Reporter

rawstory / myway (http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fapnews.myway.com% 2Farticle%2F20061013%2FD8KNNIMG0.html)
October 13, 2006

OXFORD, England (AP) - A coroner ruled Friday that U.S. forces unlawfully killed a British television journalist in the opening days of the Iraq war.

Deputy Coroner Andrew Walker said he would ask the attorney general to take steps to bring to justice those responsible for the death of Terry Lloyd, 50, a veteran reporter for the British television network ITN.

Witnesses testified during the weeklong inquest that Lloyd - who was driving with fellow ITN reporters from Kuwait toward Basra, Iraq - was shot in the back by Iraqi troops who overtook his car, then died after U.S. fire hit a civilian minivan being used as an ambulance and struck him in the head.

"Terry Lloyd died following a gunshot wound to the head. The evidence this bullet was fired by the Americans is overwhelming," Walker said. "There is no doubt that the minibus presented no threat to the American forces. There is no doubt it was an unlawful act of fire."

ITN cameraman Daniel Demoustier, the sole survivor of the incident, told the inquest that ITN's pair of four-wheel drive vehicles were overtaken by a truck carrying Iraqi forces and that gunfire erupted.

"The hell broke loose completely. I was absolutely sure I was going to die," Demoustier told the inquest. Driving blindly in smoke, Demoustier said he realized the passenger door was open and Lloyd was gone.

Demoustier, a Belgian, said he jumped from his flaming car and lay in the sand, waiting for the shooting to stop. Demoustier said he tried to stand to signal U.S. tanks in the area but that they resumed firing at the clearly marked ITN vehicles.

Demoustier said he saw a Red Crescent ambulance arrive and pick up people. He was later taken to safety in the car of a British newspaper reporter.

The coroner said Friday that a civilian drove up in a minivan, pulled a U-turn and picked up four wounded Iraqi soldiers, then saw Lloyd with a press card around his neck and helped him into the van. Lloyd was shot in the head as the van drove off toward a hospital, the coroner said.

Demoustier said after the ruling that the inquest had not made clear whether the bullet that killed Lloyd was fired by a U.S. tank or helicopter. He said the forces in a tank would have been able to see that they were firing at a civilian vehicle, but a helicopter would not.

The U.S. Embassy in London said it had no immediate reaction to the ruling.

Lloyd's widow, Lynn, in a statement read by her lawyer, said U.S. forces "allowed their soldiers to behave like trigger-happy cowboys in an area in which there were civilians traveling."

She called the killing a war crime - "a despicable, deliberate, vengeful act."

Lloyd and the three other ITN crew members were some of the few Western reporters who covered the fighting on their own, while most others were embedded with U.S. or British forces.

Lebanese interpreter Hussein Osman also was killed in the ITN crew, and cameraman Fred Nerac remains missing and presumed dead.

U.S. authorities didn't allow servicemen to testify at the inquest. Several submitted statements that the coroner ruled inadmissible.

The court watched a video Tuesday, filmed by a U.S. serviceman attached to one of the tanks accused of firing at the reporters' cars. The tape opens with images of Lloyd's vehicle and the Iraqi truck burning amid gunfire. The tanks drive to the cars and inspect them. A minivan - possibly the ambulance - appears and more shots are fired.

At the end of the tape, a U.S. soldier shouts, "It's some media personnel! That's media down there!"

A forensic examiner said the first 15 minutes of the tape may have been erased.

In Britain, inquests take place when a person dies violently, unexpectedly, or of unknown causes. In the case of an overseas death, the inquest is held in the first English jurisdiction where the body is returned.

&#169; 2006 IAC Search & Media.

MrSpice
October 15th, 2006, 01:50 AM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MrSpice
I have just a few questions to You.
1. What is democracy?
2. What country have a democracy?
3. Are Bush is simbol of democracy?
4. Are USA is simbol of democracy?
5. Do You love your Motherland?
6. Do You objective in your oppinions?
7. Why in USA is two identic politic party: Democracy and Respublican (Demo-cracy and Res-publica have identic translation, as you know.)
Where is your another political party? Like Liberal, Social, Communistical, National, Party of Mothers, Party of Workers? Why only TWO party?
Why American people have a poor choice between democratic and respublican lider? Why? Is it democracy? Is it same as ONE Communistical party in USSR in 1918-1991? Tell me...


1. The main principles of democracy, in my opinion are the following things:
a) Independent judicial system - courts, judges, etc. The most important judges are either elected by the people or selected for life - like in the US Supreme Court.
b) Independent press from TV to newspapers to radio. For example, by law, the US government cannot own TV or radio station that broadcasts in the country. The only government owned radio station is Voice or America that broadcasts abroad.
c) Separation of powers when one branch of government has control over another. In the US, the Supreme Court can invalidate any law or decision made by president or Congress. And COngress can impeach the president in certain cases. For example, president Nixon had to resign or he'd be impeached by congress.
d) Ease to open a business without any coppruption or bribes. It takes minutes to open a business in any truly democratic country, including the US.

2. Truly democratic countries are Canada, US, United Kingdon, Australia, Germany, other developed western-european countries, as well as such countries as Hungary, Estonia, etc.

3. Bush is not the symbol of democracy. I personally don't like Bush and voted against him. Just like any president, he cannot stay in office for more than 8 years. He won by a slim majority and mostly because his opponent was not very organized and for some other domestic reasons that you don't hear about. Democratic countries can have bad even terrible presidents and leaders. Democracy is not a perfect system. As long as the system has checks and balances, these kinds of mistakes can be corrected over time.

4. USA along with other developed countries can be good examples how democracy leads to prosperity for its people and opportunities. Virtually all countries that are free and democratic are weathy or growing. Companies like to invest in the countries that predictable and democratic. Democracy is good for business.

5. I love my motherland for some things, but I also love America that gave me a new hope and the opportunities I would never have in Russia.

6. No one can claim to be objective. Our opinions are subjective.

7. You should read some more about various democratic systems. Multi-party systems like the one you can find in Germany or Austria or 2-party systems that you would see in United Kingdom and the US have their own advantages and disadvantages. There are lots of other parties in the US - Green Party, Libertarian Party and others. They have not become big enough to become a real alternative to the main 2 parties. There are lots of articles about this subject on the web. Just read and educated yourself before you argue. Knowledge is power.

Some links for you in Russian and English:

http://temadnya.ru/spravka/05nov2002/1846.html

http://www.infousa.ru/government/dmpaper1.htm

http://www.infousa.ru/government/dmpaper8.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_party_system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_under_the_United_States_Const itution

ablarc
October 15th, 2006, 11:29 AM
^ Good post, MrSpice.

lofter1
October 15th, 2006, 12:07 PM
A Journalist’s Revelations, in Life and in Death


CHILL WIND IN MOSCOW

http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/10/15/weekinreview/15chivers_CA0.600.jpg
NTV, via Agence France-Press — Getty Images
CRIME SCENE Images from a security camera show the journalist Anna Politkovskaya, right,
entering a building where she was killed, and a suspect in the murder.


nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/15/weekinreview/15chivers.html?_r=1&oref=slogin)
By C. J. CHIVERS
October 15, 2006


MOSCOW


In death as in life, Anna Politkovskaya proved adept at exposing modern Russia’s dark side.


Ms. Politkovskaya, 48, was a special correspondent for the newspaper Novaya Gazeta and an author of books that documented crimes and callousness in the war in Chechnya. She was also a tireless critic of the Kremlin and President Vladimir V. Putin, a role she kept at even as other anti-Kremlin voices here were muzzled under Mr. Putin’s centralized rule.


She was killed on Oct. 7, shot with a pistol in the body, and then in the head — the finishing touch delivered in a coldly efficient form of murder that is known in the grim jargon of Russian police officers and criminals as a “controlling shot.”


Investigators and her colleagues say her death had been contracted to silence her work. It led to international outpourings of sorrow, and demands for an honest investigation to bring the killers before the bar. President Bush made one such call.


The story could have stalled there, but it did not. Here in Russia, as friends and co-workers buried her last week, Ms. Politkovskaya seemed to remain busy lifting the veil off just the side of Russia that she had fought against.


With her killers at large and no clear evidence of who had ordered her death, speculation swirled that official Russia had sent hit men her way. Russian officials, it seemed, did not know how to react.


Mr. Putin first treated the event, which was given significant air time on even his state-controlled news, with a three-day silence, as other world leaders expressed condolences.


The Kremlin’s silence seemed to scream. When at last he spoke, having been prodded at a news conference in Germany, Russia’s president used the occasion to insult her. “The level of her influence on political life in Russia was utterly insignificant,” he said.


Meanwhile, Mr. Putin’s main proxy in Chechnya and a frequent subject of Ms. Politkovskaya’s writing, the Chechen prime minister, Ramzan A. Kadyrov, proclaimed his innocence in a manner perhaps never before heard from a premier’s lips. He could not have killed her, he effectively said, because the record would show that he had never killed a woman before.


“I did not kill women and I never kill them,” he said on national television.


Normally, little is less difficult in statecraft than the protocol of condolence.


Officials the world over routinely pause to reflect upon the deaths of figures with whom they share the public stage. Often the displays seem scripted. Sometimes they feel sincere. Rarely are they outright bungled.


For official Russia, Ms. Politkovskaya’s killing posed problems. The Kremlin faced the memory of a journalist who was celebrated abroad, but whom it had tried to make a nonperson at home.


Her commentary on Russian television had long ago ceased, as dissenters were forced from the air by Mr. Putin’s brand of message management. And her books, translated into several languages, are almost impossible to find here, echoing the days of samizdat.


The Kremlin was stuck. They had done what they could to push Ms. Politkovskaya and her lot to the margins. And her message stalked them past her end. Then came Mr. Putin’s biting remark.


Masha Gessen, another Moscow writer who has maintained her criticism of the Kremlin, reacted with anger. “The murder has exposed him, with unprecedented clarity, as a callous, cruel and cynical man,” she wrote in The Moscow Times.


Thus the week’s mourning trailed off with a familiar feel about the Russian president and his circle, a group that exudes power and confidence in one moment, petulance and unease the next.


Mr. Putin’s public appearances often reveal a president with an alert, disciplined mind. His command of detail can seem Clintonesque. But he is also prone to acidic asides, often painfully timed, that reveal all the humor of a sniper.


His gaffes have become a small canon. In 2000, Larry King asked him about what happened to the Kursk, a submarine that under mysterious circumstances had ended up disabled on the sea bed with its entire crew dead. “It sank,” Mr. Putin said.


Two years later, at a news conference in Brussels, a French reporter asked him a pointed question about Chechnya. Mr. Putin suggested that the reporter might want to become a radical Islamist, and invited him to Moscow for a circumcision, saying he could recommend a procedure so that nothing would grow back.


The remark did nothing to dispel perceptions that sanctioned cruelty had run amok in Chechnya, a world that Ms. Politkovskaya labeled, in a book title, “A Small Corner of Hell.”


For Ms. Politkovskaya, who journeyed repeatedly into that place, the price was her life. From her flower-covered casket, her breath stopped by bullets, she offered once again a peek at the Kremlin’s heart. To those who mourned her, it looked like ice.


Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

ablarc
October 15th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Bad guys currently run both U.S. and Russia. We'll get rid of ours in a bit over two years. Russia may not be so fortunate.

WebErr
October 16th, 2006, 01:39 AM
ablarc
We have lucky day 1st of January in 2000. :)

lofter1
Well, it is. Did You read at most one article about "bloody Cremlin", "fight for Freedom" or some like this. Each one, who know people, living in Russia, can say: "All about Politkovskaya write is only sh...!" And will be right.
Politkovskaya have very much awards outside Russia. She write for readers outside Russia. You was her targets. This reason for "sensational" materials.
But You can buy newspaper in any place of Moskow. But read once in Russia You will never read it sh.. again. Believe me it is. Because she was sensation lier.

MrSpice
You can be objective. If you be abstract over yourself you will made it. It is, what perhaps bobrik means when said "do not be American". He want You to abstract over youself and think about it.
Another way for objective need some fantasy. Just imagine you in the opposite to yourself point of view. This is the way of argue another point of view to "another man".
Just try. It is easy. :)

About democracy. We eat your democracy, thank you very much. Your life style is too much different from our life style. We will get ourself way of people-rules system. We have people, we have country, we have freedom, give us independence from Older Brother. Your system is disbalanced system. We must find our way for Russia. Just believe us.

With best regards,
Vladimir (Yaroslavl citizen)

lofter1
October 16th, 2006, 08:37 AM
Each one, who know people, living in Russia, can say: "All about Politkovskaya write is only sh...!" And will be right.

...she was sensation lier.

I'm not claiming that Politkovskaya was a saint ...


However I find it hard to believe that she manufactured stories such as this one, which by many indications is truthful -- and wherein she asks the same question that American's must ask:
“Are we, the lawful, fighting against the unlawful? Or are we battling ‘their’ lawlessness with ‘ours?’ ”

Slain Reporter’s Last Story Bares Chechen Torture


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/10/12/world/12torture.jpg
Novaya Gazeta
Grainy images from cellphone videotapes
showing Chechens being tortured were
published in the Novaya Gazeta newspaper
along with the last article of its slain
correspondent, Anna Politkovskaya.


nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/world/europe/13chechnya.html?ref=media)
By C. J. CHIVERS
October 13, 2006


MOSCOW, Oct. 12 — The newspaper Novaya Gazeta (http://www.online-translator.com/url/tran_ url.asp?lang=en&direction=re&template=General&transliterate=&autotranslate=on&url=http://2006.novayagazeta.ru/nomer/2006/78n/n78n-s01.shtml) on Thursday published the last article by its slain special correspondent, Anna Politkovskaya, along with transcripts of videotaped torture sessions of Chechens that she had obtained in her work. (Note: That link ^^^ is to an "auto-translated" Russian > English article from that newspaper.)


The article, an unfinished column that presented new allegations of torture by security forces in Chechnya, appeared on the same day that the European Court of Human Rights issued a RULING (http:// RULING) holding Russia responsible for the killings of five Chechen civilians in early 2000 by Russian police officers.


The victims of that incident included a 1-year-old boy and his young mother, who was eight months pregnant. All of the victims were shot, and the mother’s jewelry was stolen, the court said.


The article also appeared as the federal prosecutor’s office in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, said it was checking into reports of the disappearance of another prominent Chechen: the mother of the last wife of Shamil Basayev, the terrorist leader who died in an explosion in June. The woman, Rita Ersenoyeva, has been missing since Oct. 2, human rights workers say, and had spent the last several weeks searching for her daughter, who had been kidnapped as well after what her mother had described as a forced marriage to the terrorist leader.


Ms. Politkovskaya, one of Russia’s best-known journalists and human rights advocates, was fatally shot on Saturday, apparently the victim of a contract killing. The events on Thursday together served as a sort of coda on her life, reminders of the lingering chaos and human costs of the war in Chechnya, which Russia insists has been won.


Ms. Politkovskaya, 48, was a leader among the shrinking group of Russian journalists who dared to keep challenging that thinking, by writing frankly about the violence and disorder in the republic. Chechnya, her work said, remains a place where open fighting has slowed but murky police and military operations continue, and chilling behavior by Russian forces and the Kremlin’s proxies is a dark norm.


Her final article, a column under the headline “We Declare You a Terrorist,” presented allegations of the use of torture to exact confessions and manufacture good news from the war.


“When prosecutors and the courts work, not for the sake of the law, but on political commission and with the only goal of providing good reports for the Kremlin, then criminal cases are baked like pancakes,” she wrote. “An assembly line producing ‘open-hearted confessions’ effectively guarantees good data on the war on terror.”


She asked: “Are we, the lawful, fighting against the unlawful? Or are we battling ‘their’ lawlessness with ‘ours?’ ”


The article described the case of Beslan Gadayev, a Chechen migrant deported from Ukraine to Chechnya, where he claimed in a letter to Ms. Politkovskaya that he had been asked if he committed certain unsolved murders.


When he said he had not, he wrote, he was punched near an eye, beaten, tied up, handcuffed, hung from a pipe and then connected to electric cable, whose current was switched on. In time, he said, he confessed and the next day he was told to confess again in front of journalists and to say that his injuries were a result of an escape attempt.


The article was accompanied by images from videos that Ms. Politkovskaya had obtained of an armed Chechen, who her newspaper said was presumably a member of the Chechen armed forces, torturing at least one man.


Not long after the newspaper was published Thursday morning, the European Court of Human Rights released a unanimous decision blaming Russia for deaths of five members of the Estamirov family in Grozny in early 2000, a period when Russian forces had just wrested control of the capital from separatists.


It also found that Russia had failed to adequately investigate the killings, which were part of a sweep operation that Human Rights Watch, the American-based organization, investigated and called a massacre.


At least 60 civilians were killed, shot at close range, human rights workers said, apparently by enraged police units from St. Petersburg and Ryazan who were looting the neighborhood. Nobody has ever been charged for the crimes. The court on Thursday ordered Russia to pay about 230,000 euros, or about $290,000, in damages to the victims’ relatives.


Ole Solvang, executive director of the Stitching Russian Justice Initiative, a private organization that has helped survivors of the Chechen war seek justice in the European Court, said the evidence showed that the deaths were deliberate. For example, he said, the slain 1-year-old boy, Khasan Estamirov, was shot multiple times at close range. At least one shot was to the head.


“They just went completely nuts that day,” Mr. Solvang said. “It was horrible.”


Russia, which earlier this year also was found responsible by the court for the summary execution of a young Ingush fighter at about the same time, made no comment on the case. It has three months to appeal.


Later in the day, Valery Kuznetsov, the top federal prosecutor in Chechnya, said by telephone that his office was looking into reports that Rita Ersenoyeva had been abducted.


Kidnappings, both to gain ransom and to kill suspected rebels and their supporters, have been a part of life in Chechnya for more than a decade. Human rights groups say Russian forces or Chechens loyal to the Kremlin premier are often responsible.


Ms. Ersenoyeva disappeared on Oct. 2 after being summoned by telephone to an administration building in the village of Stariye Atagi, according to Tanya Lokshina, chairwoman of Center Demos, a human rights group. Neither Ms. Lokshina nor Mr. Kuznetsov said they had found witnesses to the abduction.


But Ms. Ersenoyeva has not been heard from since she left for the meeting, Ms. Lokshina said, adding that Ms. Ersenoyeva left eagerly after a caller told her that there was good news about her daughter, who in August had vanished as well after gunmen seized her from the street.


Copyright 2006The New York Times Company

***

Attached: Front page of Novaya Gazeta following the killing of Anna Politkovskaya ...

***

WebErr
October 16th, 2006, 12:19 PM
I almost read it in Russian.
Only for people who believe in the bear in the streets in Russia.
Get ready to listen about "bloody regime of Kremlin" once again.
Better if she will live again - then we never listen her nonsenses public!!!

I want to kill her killer! It was bad for Russia to kill her...

Note: if you touch the sh..t then it will be stink, better let it stand dry.
(It was similar translation.)

P.S. People want to believe. Just throw them waht they want.
Politkovskaya always use First Rule of Wizard: people want to believe in they interesting things...

P.S.2. And repeat it once again: noone of Russian want to kill her, try to find killer in your ranks. We almost didn't know about Politkovskaya. It is true.

bobrik
October 16th, 2006, 08:29 PM
The press of USA is independent? It is a joke?
They will tell that we did not know her because we have censorship. :D :)
I speak. It is useless...

lofter1
October 16th, 2006, 10:14 PM
Just so I'm clear on what both WebErr and bobrik are saying (and understanding that you both might be saying something entirely different from the other) ...

Are you saying that Politkovskaya was not published in the Russian mainstream press because she made up stories about what was going on in Chechnya?

Or are you saying that because she had found some unwelcome truths -- and there were those in power who didn't want this to become known -- that there was a concerted effort to keep her stories from the public?

WebErr
October 17th, 2006, 02:46 AM
lofter1
She was only lier. No more.
Noone Russian soldier can do what she written.
We are civil community, we are not "bears in the streets".
Many my friends was in Chechnya... they could not lie! But she was lier.
But I have not any proof for you. Only my friends tells.
She was most popular in EU, because EU lider want to see Russia as the Big Bear, not as community of humen.
Do not believe to this "free press", because it was sold to very rich Outsider Master, who buy Chelsea.

MrSpice
Ok, now is the time to create parties like Publicratic and Resdemosic politic parties - it will be 4 parties!!! 2x 8)
Well, it was historical reason for this way, but it is a very poor choice in the same ideas.
Truth born in disput.

MrSpice
October 17th, 2006, 10:01 AM
The press of USA is independent? It is a joke?
They will tell that we did not know her because we have censorship. :D :)
I speak. It is useless...

You speak poorly and your English is terrible. Once you have a chance to improve your English a bit, please read some American newspapers before criticizing them. I don't think you ever read American newspapers. You are just repeating what your hear on your Putin-controlled TV. Read it for yourself and then we will talk.

http://www.nytimes.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com

http://www.latimes.com

Ninjahedge
October 17th, 2006, 11:09 AM
Spice, while I agree that he does not seem to be too well exposed (especially seeing how he is branding ALL news as "American Press"), but try not to be insulting.

I disagree with most of what he is saying, but using the typical reactionary response ("putin controlled TV"), true or otherwise, will only get more "See, you Americans know nothing! Your press is all lies. We know truth. Russia great you know nothing. American Press. I speak, it useless."

That is not a discussion, it is just two people banging their heads against a wall that THEY BUILT in order to try to convince the other how solid that wall of seperation is.

WebErr
October 18th, 2006, 03:29 AM
bobrik perhaps just a little boy. May be older just a bit...


MrSpice
- is Democracy not a Equality of each Individual in his human rights?
- is Democracy Freedom and Independance for each human from each other?
- is Democracy Responsibility of each human, who crying about his rights?
- is Democracy Order completed by each one responsibility, not by the law only?
- is Democracy comunity is people whos target is money stream?
- is Democracy idea what united the World?
- is Democracy just a ground for invasion in the life of another countries?
Well, just answer it...
I have bit more questions...

ZippyTheChimp
October 18th, 2006, 08:56 AM
Is Democracy a gift from a perfect God?

Or is it conceived and administered by imperfect humans?


You seem to be justifying your country's problems with Democracy by pointing out that America also has problems. Big deal. We know that. While there is a range of opinion among American citizens concerning the state of our democracy, you hardly hear anyone saying, "At least we're not as bad as Russia."


is Democracy just a ground for invasion in the life of another countries?You will find much debate about this among the American press and the electorate - that's Democracy.


Noone Russian soldier can do what she written.Why? Are Russian soldiers better than everyone else?

It was hard for many Americans to believe that US soldiers could do such things, and the government would have liked to suppress it, but the story got out, and 7 Marines are charged with murder.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-100606marine,0,4343580.story?track=mostviewed-homepage


Many my friends was in Chechnya... they could not lie! But she was lier.Do your friend know about EVERYTHING that happens in Chechnya?


But I have not any proof for you. Only my friends tells.That means you know nothing. You should welcome the investigation, or are you afraid of the truth?

If you want your press to be free, you have to allow it to operate, even if what they dig up is unpleasant.

MrSpice
October 18th, 2006, 09:00 AM
MrSpice
- is Democracy not a Equality of each Individual in his human rights?
- is Democracy Freedom and Independance for each human from each other?
- is Democracy Responsibility of each human, who crying about his rights?
- is Democracy Order completed by each one responsibility, not by the law only?
- is Democracy comunity is people whos target is money stream?
- is Democracy idea what united the World?
- is Democracy just a ground for invasion in the life of another countries?
Well, just answer it...
I have bit more questions...

Democracy is a system of government where on virtually every level people are elected to the office, not appointed (like governors in Russia, for example). Where the rights of the press to say whatever it desires are guaranteed and cannot be limited by law. I don't know what you're driving at. I have been living in the United States for more than 11 years now and can tell you that in most respects, United States is a democracy. Money streams are of interest to most people in any country, whether it's democratic or not. Moscow is a good example of a place where money rules the day - where owning an expenisve over-the-top car or a fancy piece of clothing seems to be very important to many people. That does not make Moscow any more democratic. In other words, free market and capitalism exist in all democratic countries, but capitalism can exist without much freedom and democracy - China is a good example of that.

Since you mentioned invasions, I assume you wanted to bring up a topic of Iraq and how the US invaded this country without any solid reason that Iraq did the US any harm. Well, I totally agree with you that this was a terrible mistake on the part of the US and that is why Bush is less and less popular in this country. Here in New York, less than 20% of people support Bush. That does not make United States undemocratic. It just shows that any country can make a serious mistake for which it's going to be blamed for many years to come...

bobrik
October 18th, 2006, 04:08 PM
USA Since 1945 were mistaken 22 times. USA were mistaken 22 times attacking on other countries.
I enough big boy to see it.
USA have killed much more people than the USSR. It sees everyone.

lofter1
October 18th, 2006, 04:26 PM
OK, I cry "uncle".

You hate us more.

Argument over ...

bobrik
October 18th, 2006, 06:22 PM
Still is not. But you teach us to it well.

GrandpaLenin
October 18th, 2006, 11:29 PM
interesting point of view:


The Emerging Russian Giant
Plays its Cards Strategically

By F William Engdahl, October 9, 2006

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Russian_Giant/russian_giant.html


MrSpice

You speak poorly and your English is terrible.


What does it prove?



Once you have a chance to improve your English a bit, please read some American newspapers before criticizing them. I don't think you ever read American newspapers.


You are wrong. Please see http://inosmi.ru/ for example. WP, WSJ, NYT, etc. etc Asian Times , China press all in one. All in in Russian.



You are just repeating what your hear on your Putin-controlled TV.


LOL



Read it for yourself and then we will talk.

WebErr
October 19th, 2006, 02:42 AM
ZippyTheChimp
You must read this sh.. of what Politovskaya wtitten before you compare she with your not bad journalists. She was really hate us... But she is dead and I don't want to speak about it. Just read it...
You read and see: we are monsters! Hate us!

MrSpice
You said: "Where the rights of the press to say whatever it desires are guaranteed and cannot be limited by law".
Now understand it... ok?
Press MUST be under the law, must be helper of law and everyone of journalists community MUST feel responsibility for reader.

In US press each journalist can say any lie about Russia, Russians, Russian President and nowhere is the court where we can have any justice. Just we can write in this forum. We want just a bit of responsibility and justice.
But it is only the voice in the darkness... 8(

lofter1
October 19th, 2006, 09:55 AM
Press MUST be under the law, must be helper of law and everyone of journalists community ...

And there ^^^ (perhaps) is one of the basic philosophical differences between the USA / Russia ...

" ... Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."

--Thomas Jefferson (http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1600.htm) to Edward Carrington, 1787. ME 6:57

However, he also said:

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. (http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/468.html)"

***

MrSpice
October 19th, 2006, 09:57 AM
MrSpice
You said: "Where the rights of the press to say whatever it desires are guaranteed and cannot be limited by law".
Now understand it... ok?
Press MUST be under the law, must be helper of law and everyone of journalists community MUST feel responsibility for reader.

In US press each journalist can say any lie about Russia, Russians, Russian President and nowhere is the court where we can have any justice. Just we can write in this forum. We want just a bit of responsibility and justice.
But it is only the voice in the darkness... 8(

Yes, the press can say any lie about anyone. That is what freedom of speech is all about. But most large and prestigious newspapers like New York Times are rarely lying. I read The New York Times virtually every day and I have not seen any lies about Russia in that newspaper. Where did you get this idea that the US press is lying about Russia? Or maybe they are saying something that seems like a lie to you because you're ill-informed? You should really wake up. What has been happening in Russia in the past 2-3 years under Putin's rule has not been good for freedom of speech in Russia. It's clearly a rollback to the old times.

MrSpice
October 19th, 2006, 09:58 AM
By the way, here is the live streaming webcam of St Petersburg (Vasilievsky Island area):

http://www.ipnet.ru/english/city/vo/webcam/video640/

Edward
October 19th, 2006, 10:44 AM
" ... Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."

Jefferson sounds like Bakunin here.

WebErr
October 19th, 2006, 11:24 AM
lofter1 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=4502)
That President of USA was really interesting.

MrSpice

Yes, the press can say any lie about anyone. That is what freedom of speech is all about. But most large and prestigious newspapers like New York Times are rarely lying. I read The New York Times virtually every day and I have not seen any lies about Russia in that newspaper. Where did you get this idea that the US press is lying about Russia? Or maybe they are saying something that seems like a lie to you because you're ill-informed? You should really wake up. What has been happening in Russia in the past 2-3 years under Putin's rule has not been good for freedom of speech in Russia. It's clearly a rollback to the old times.
Freedom must be balanced by responsibility. In US press we can see that things (in NY Times too), analitic counting few facts, splice it in any comfortable and readable idea, adding there some "sensation component" and throw it to the readers. Sometimes we can feel lobby of politicans in this or there articles. Is it free press? Free for sold?
About how I informed: I under the Putin propaganda, I read only "Putin's weak", watching only "Putin's TV". We are lost little Russians, please, help us, return Democracy to us! We want to have Democracy, but Putin put us back in the Dark... Do you really believe in this. We are the most reading country in the World, not so easy to deceive us. We know what is American propaganda, and we will always remember that. We remember what is Soviet propaganda too. We have a good experiance to be independent of any propaganda in TV, Web or Newspapars. ;)
Do not forget that.

P.S. We just want to fill the order in the news. We tired of any "Democracy" or "Communistic" ideology.
Putin do what we want. We could choose Putin in third time, because he is interesting for Russians, he understand us and he working, not resting.

P.S.2. Putin never kill any journalist. High criminal situation is the Inheritance of Yeltsyn Age. Too much Freedom and Independance in the street... ;)

MrSpice
October 19th, 2006, 12:20 PM
lofter1 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=4502)


MrSpice

Freedom must be balanced by responsibility. In US press we can see that things (in NY Times too), analitic counting few facts, splice it in any comfortable and readable idea, adding there some "sensation component" and throw it to the readers. Sometimes we can feel lobby of politicans in this or there articles. Is it free press? Free for sold?


Nothing is completely free. Obviosuly, any form of press in any country is infuenced by many factors. But before you blame and critisize anything, you need to know what you're talking about. You have not answered my question: have you ever read The New York Times? Please provide a specific example where The New York Times or Washington Post lied about Russia. I believe that these are very good and mostly very balanced newspapers (yes, they balance freedom and responsibility quite well). So please give specific examples instead of general talk about "press for sale" and "balancing freedom with responsibility"

I read quite a bit of Russian press (as I speak and read Russian fluently) and the Russian press does not strike me as netiher free, balanced or responsible. Russian TV (1st channel in particular), sounds like it was produced in the 80s with Putin the great leader that does everything right.

I feel that it's always better to have total freedom and let people figure out what the truth is. It is certainly better than TV totally under control by the Russian government. There's not a single mainstream independent TV channel in Russia today - and that is very very sad.

You can elect Putin the 3rd or 4th time. But any opposition candidate - even if he was the best person in the world - would have no chance to present his point of view, because all of the TV networks are in Putin's hands, thanks to people like you that feel that this is OK.

WebErr
October 19th, 2006, 02:45 PM
MrSpice

Well, You are opponent for yourself. "Nothing is completely free", but "I feel that it's always better to have total freedom and let people figure out what the truth is".
I want to explain to You thing what schoolboys in the Russian schools learn in the younger age: "Human have a Right for Freedom, Freedom is well until do not hurt the Freedom of other Human". Bad translation, but...
Freedom always limited - it is true. But Freedom MUST be limited, because Human is Bio-Social creature. Socium limited Freedom of each Human. And it is beutiful... :)
We have enough Freedom and enough Knowledge to rule ourself and understand where is Truth and where is Propaganda. :)
We had a choice what you never had. We choose our way. Now we going to the Future. To the Balance of Freedom and Responsibility...

P.S. I have read NY Times regulary. And BBC News. We are not the Bears. I watching 1st Channel too. Reading online press. I endeavour to stand objective, believe me. Now I talking with a Freedom citizen of New-York. You can say me about bloody regime of Putin now. But do not think by stereotypes in your talking! This is the way of propaganda.

Ninjahedge
October 19th, 2006, 03:33 PM
We aren't Web.

You keep saying "don't use stereotypes" but yet you keep stereotyping us.

You are associating the same bias that is evidenced in/on "Fox" news to the NYT. You are probably reading the O-Ed section and thinking "Gee, what a bunch of Russian hating zealots" or something.

Please try to refrain from a 'you think you think you think" argument and try to focus more on stuff you can reference directly. You say that the NYT is biased, well show us where, and tell us why. If you can't, then you are just spreading rumors.

As for the story about the reporter who was killed, you can't blindly say that there was no connection whatsoever to the people she was reporting on. Remember our little Valerie Plame deal? Our noble leader decided to expose an undercover agent because one of his former employees went to the press to talk about his administration. IOW, something bad was being written about him, so he reacted and "punished" the source.

You think Putin has NEVER done something like that? You think that there are no forces not under Putin's direct control that would not have this done without his direct knowledge or consent?

The only other thing that annoys me about this whole argument (it stopped being a discussion about 80 posts ago) is that we are trying to deify or at least realize our leaders to where every action performed was either a direct action by them, or was somehow under their eye.

Instead of saying "I don't think Putin himself would have ordered her death" you resort to "She was nothing but a liar".

What the hell kind of argument is that? She is still dead. Someone still killed her, and her last story was about the wrongdoings of the soldiers and of the Russian Government. So who would go to the trouble of executing her? Maybe we should try to explore that. Or maybe the possibility that Putin is NOT in control of all the factions of his government and is trying to both control, and hide this from his countrymen to avoid a shattering of public confidence.

Lets get back into reality instead of discrediting every source that questions your leaders veracity.

MrSpice
October 19th, 2006, 04:40 PM
MrSpice

Well, You are opponent for yourself. "Nothing is completely free", but "I feel that it's always better to have total freedom and let people figure out what the truth is".
I want to explain to You thing what schoolboys in the Russian schools learn in the younger age: "Human have a Right for Freedom, Freedom is well until do not hurt the Freedom of other Human". Bad translation, but...
Freedom always limited - it is true. But Freedom MUST be limited, because Human is Bio-Social creature. Socium limited Freedom of each Human. And it is beutiful... :)
We have enough Freedom and enough Knowledge to rule ourself and understand where is Truth and where is Propaganda. :)
We had a choice what you never had. We choose our way. Now we going to the Future. To the Balance of Freedom and Responsibility...

P.S. I have read NY Times regulary. And BBC News. We are not the Bears. I watching 1st Channel too. Reading online press. I endeavour to stand objective, believe me. Now I talking with a Freedom citizen of New-York. You can say me about bloody regime of Putin now. But do not think by stereotypes in your talking! This is the way of propaganda.

I would like freedom to be limted, as you said, by "Human Bio-Social Nature", not by the government, as in Russia.

It is true, the internet is still a free forum in Russia. Putin did not get his hands on that yet, simply because he does not see it as a threat. After all, only a small percent of people in Russia have access to the internet. Most of them are in large cities like Moscow and St Petersburg.

I did not say you were "the bear"

It looks like you're trying to show as people on the outside really want to critisize Russia. First of all, I was born in Russia and lived there for 20 years. So, I know first-hand what life out there is like. I still have several friends who live in St Petersburg and I can understand when I read lies and when I don't. I think US Press does not give enough coverage to what's happening in Russia and does not critisize Putin enough.

I guess when we talk about freedoms, it's also a question of believe. I believe that free market system and individual freedoms are important and if people truly have those freedoms, the society prospers.

You can compare Russia with another former Soviet state - Estonia. Estonia established European-style rule of law. The elections are truly democratic. The press is free. They simplified the tax law and pretty much abolished any visa regime for Americans, Canadians and Europeans. And now Estonia is the fastest growing state in Europe. And they do that without having oil or other natural resources. They don't need Putin to say what is good to say. They are OK with just being free in the Western sense of that word.

Index of Eocnomic Freedom - Estonia is #7 and Russia is # 122: http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.cfm

MrSpice
October 19th, 2006, 05:10 PM
One American article about Russia and Putin and the Russian one (in Russian):

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/16/russias_slow_death_of_freedom/

http://www.hrw.org/russian/reports/2005/world/russia.html

bobrik
October 19th, 2006, 05:19 PM
ОООО... You have opened my eyes! :D :D :D :D

WebErr
October 20th, 2006, 02:28 AM
Ninjahedge
Watch "Fox Kids" and be happy. Last Politkovskaya work was not about Putin. :) If you want to believe in this, read "Novaya Gazeta" and believe in all what written there. :) Politkovskaya was not the only who write "sensations" about "Russia inside". She was the best of the liers, not the only! If You want, you can live in Moskow and read this nonsenses in "Novaya Gazeta".
Her last works was about someone Chechen, who was beaten by Chechen police. And also she write about big criminal group. About Putin and "Democracy" she did not write. :) Just relax and start thinking. Watch around and be Free. Knowledge isn't Power - it is Instrument for Intellect, and Intellect is really Power. Just start to use this power. ;)
She can be killed by Skinhead (thx, democracy!) or one of the that criminal group, about Politkovskaya write. May be she was killed by her Master. I don't know. Why Putin??? Show some respect to President and very good man.

MrSpice
You live 20 years in USSR, ok? :)
Russian Federation is 15 years age. :D

About Estonia... Do you REALLY know what is in Estonia happens? I can tell you!!! Estonia and Latvia is Natists regime, where is discrimination of Russians, Russian language, Russian culture. If they have REAL democracy then better have a anarchy. I could not believe: You call Nationalistic country as Democratic... :mad: Go and live in Estonia at least 1 year and don't try to speak Russian there! And continue reading US Press. They are freedom and independant of your two so different political parties... ;)

Noone of my Goverment does not limit my freedom, freedom of any my friend and freedom of someone, whos I know.
Exactly now we have a pocitical hybrid culture of USSR and USA (and some of EU too). If you can not understand this, stand aside and do not try to "Tell us about Real Democracy", because Democracy is the Power of People, who living In This country, not Outside.
We have well democracy, but have too many problem of Yeltsyn Period, who did not solve any problems of Gorbachov Period, but add new...

Read your press, believe in Your Democracy and be happy in your country.

P.S. About this article, what you want me to read, I already read it. Do you really believe in this?

P.S.2. Freedom is not a question of Believe. Freedom is a question of Civil Rights. (Of cource if Democracy will stand a Religion then may be...) :) Believe in Democracy! Democracy is One in Duality of Two Political Parties... :)

ZippyTheChimp
October 20th, 2006, 06:23 AM
WebErr:

When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass is up in the air.

Then, it's only a matter of time.

lofter1
October 20th, 2006, 08:57 AM
More lies in an attempt to besmirch Putin the Perfect ...

In Russia, Leading Rights Groups Forced To Suspend Operations

nysun.com (http://www.nysun.com/article/41984)
BY ADRIAN BLOMFIELD
The Daily Telegraph
October 20, 2006

http://www.nysun.com/images/clear_pix.gifMOSCOW — Several leading human-rights organizations critical of the Kremlin were forced to suspend operations yesterday after failing to meet a deadline for registration that critics said was impossible to meet.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, which have riled the Russian government for chronicling state-sponsored human-rights abuses, were among scores of organizations that had to stop work.

The development drew statements of concern from America and the European Union.

A new law requires foreign pro-democracy groups and charities to submit to draconian new measures that critics have claimed was designed to curtail one of the last arenas of free speech still left in President Putin's Russia.

"There can be no doubt that the government has laid a bureaucratic minefield in our path to make it very difficult if not impossible for us to continue in Russia," an official at one rights group said. "Whether this is just a warning shot or a taste of things to come, I don't know."

The government claimed the NGOs submitted applications only three months before Wednesday's deadline and denied the procedures were complex or cumbersome. The application form is more than 100 pages long and requires each organization to include details such as the telephone numbers of each employee in their home country. They must also provide copies of every article published in the local and international press that mentioned their work.

The government has the right to veto any NGO programs it feels are not in the interests of the state.

Some 95 organizations are affected and Doctors without Borders, a past winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, was forced to halt humanitarian work in Chechnya.

Under the law, those NGOs stopped from working now will be allowed to resume activities if they refile outstanding parts of their applications by January.

Even if the applications are approved, all foreign NGOs must submit detailed financial plans for the coming year — including the names of all people attending any conferences they might organize — by the end of the month.

Since Mr. Putin became president in 2000 most of the press has come under state control, the parliament has become a largely sycophantic rump and large parts of Russia's vast energy sector have been renationalized.

&#169; 2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

WebErr
October 20th, 2006, 09:09 AM
They can register later. Word "deadline" is not correct. Your press as well as always. :p

And of course Putin pushing to this organisation. Pushing to Democracy... as always... written to outside press... free press... may be... :D

That organizations is nice way to go away our actives out of our country.
That organizations must only to do visible their money streams.
We don't want any financial surprise like in 1998.

See the root when you looking to flower. ;)

lofter1
October 20th, 2006, 09:18 AM
They can register later. Word "deadline" is not correct. Your press as well as always.

So ^^^ the Wednesday filing date was just a "suggestion" ????

Look, my friend: both the US and Russian governments don't like these groups showing them to be acting in ways that expose the failures of government.

However it is in the greater interest of citizens everywhere that these NGOs are able to do their business.

WebErr
October 20th, 2006, 10:28 AM
Not suggestion, but registration time period is ending. They had enough time to register wherever of amount of NGO and need only 5 document. But... one of them was financial document... :D Now we looking to this circus 3rd day... another name, another masters... any another for their financial documents stand "looking good". It is really funny! :) One of them "Protectors of the Wild Nature" change name 2 times! But not be accepted anyway. May be luck next name?.. ;)
They can wait for next registration period. It will be soon. I can seek for you detailed information. Yesterday I listen it in TV but did not remember enough to be correct. I can seek it soon if You interest. :)

MrSpice
October 20th, 2006, 10:46 AM
They can register later. Word "deadline" is not correct. Your press as well as always. :p

And of course Putin pushing to this organisation. Pushing to Democracy... as always... written to outside press... free press... may be... :D

That organizations is nice way to go away our actives out of our country.
That organizations must only to do visible their money streams.
We don't want any financial surprise like in 1998.

See the root when you looking to flower. ;)

These organizations are known throughout the world as independent and fair. And there's a lot Russia needs to do to become developed and civilized. And what your favorite tzar Putin is doing with these foreign organization is designed to deflate criticism. He also recently banned foreign broadcasts on russian radio. He is clamping down on alternative views - that's all he is doing. You should open your eyes. It's amazing how you're willing to believe everyting you hear from above. So put the picture of Putin on the wall and pray in front of it every day. If it's a matter of religion, there's nothing to discuss.

WebErr
October 20th, 2006, 11:11 AM
MrSpice
Blah-blah-blah...
Disputable arguments without any facts. Try to read more press. Not only American or Britan. Canadian for example. Try to understand any point of view and then you feel be freedom. Take a freedom, do not be close for it.
About some famous organizations. You know, may be liders of these organization is fair. But financial documents must be all right anyway. If all right and "bloody regime of Putin" (khe-khe :D) pushing to it always welcome to Highest Russian or International court. But they only crying, that means they can not understand the miracles in their papers. ;)
The freedom US press can only to free Russian and register these organizations... or another miracle in their papers...:D

lofter1
http://www.rg.ru/2006/10/20/nko.html
Organizations can register to New Year, if their already working in territory of Russia.
I really understand: they need to stand in queues, they are angry and tired, but this crying about Putin... why always Putin? He is the only who live in Russia. Yes we have high level of bureaucratism (inheritance from USSR), but why Putin again?

Ninjahedge
October 20th, 2006, 11:35 AM
Why not about Putin?

Who are they supposed to yell about? Blair? Who is responsible for the in-depth registration of all organizations?

Who is responsible for the conglomeration of all media sources under the "guidance" of the government?

Who is responsible for legislation/action banning outside radio broadcasts and the like?

Just like our leaders are trying to erode our constitutional rights, your leaders are doing the same with your newly found freedoms.

The only solace is that they are talented enough to be doing it without many recognizing what they are doing and why. Yes it will help stabilize the region, but at what cost?

Sometimes Crazy Glue and Duct Tape is not the best way from keeping your kid in their car seat, even though it might be the quickest solution. The long term results are often not desirable.




One side note Web, you have to watch your tone. You are coming off as a condescending know it all that lambastes the members of this board as if they not only know nothing about your world/government, but about life in general.

You are coming off one sided and have not admitted ANY FAULT WHATSOEVER by your own leaders. You are coming off, ironically, as many Bush Supporters did shortly after the "war on terrorism" was declared. That even questioning your leaders capacity or veracity was akin to being an enemy or an idiot (or both).

Hard liners on any side of an issue are rarely taken for 100% of what they say. You say your man has not done anything wrong, you are only seeing what you want to see, and indeed what YOU have seen is not wrong to you.

WebErr
October 20th, 2006, 12:09 PM
Ninjahedge
Now is the time to understand: we always support you in your fight against terrorism. We will support you always, remember it! Always! Noone terrorist can be live after what they do in Russia and USA, and other countries!!! Terrorists must die!!! They shot little children, capturing schools! They must die!!! Any war against terrorism will be supported by Russian nation!

About Putin and Government of Russia, they understand: great PR action now going in the World in the both sides. Cold War is in the Past. Now we are not enemy. May be rivals. Anyone want to control mineral resources like oil and gas...
May be once you will recollect my words, when Russia will be splitted to independence sub-countries and American companies will be control any Russian mineral resources...

About Putin. He just a human. He was President of too much difficult country. President of Russia in too much difficult period. He just choose the way. We understand this way and support young President. Now we have paradox ideology, hybrid of democracy and communism, but it is better then be zero in democracy. Now we can be Someone, it is not so bad! Putin just use old soviet instruments to rule weak Russia. Now we are much stronger. It is the result. You can destroy everything, control mineral resources and build democracy in Russia. But people is happy now. We was a superstrong country and in th one hour we stand nothing. I'm not surprised about overwhelming majority of Russians support Putin.

About "tzar" and Putin. He will never stand tzar. He is really good man. And he need some rest. 8 years of difficult work deserve by the some respect. May be he will never stand President again, but he will always welcome after 4 years.

Ninjahedge
October 20th, 2006, 01:49 PM
Ninjahedge
Now is the time to understand: we always support you in your fight against terrorism. We will support you always, remember it! Always! Noone terrorist can be live after what they do in Russia and USA, and other countries!!! Terrorists must die!!! They shot little children, capturing schools! They must die!!! Any war against terrorism will be supported by Russian nation!

Nice zealotry there.

You realize that Terrorism is a tactic, not a nation or a group of individuals, right? Declaring a war ON a tactic is impractical because any nation can practice it at any time if they decide to. Any group of individuals can to.

That being the case, the definitions of Terrorist tactics (as opposed to guerrilla tactics, which are VERY similar) can be redefined at the whim and behest of the leader that has declaired war against it.

That becomes very dangerous.


About Putin and Government of Russia, they understand: great PR action now going in the World in the both sides. Cold War is in the Past. Now we are not enemy. May be rivals. Anyone want to control mineral resources like oil and gas...
May be once you will recollect my words, when Russia will be splitted to independence sub-countries and American companies will be control any Russian mineral resources...

What does that have to do with the discussion?

I do not see how it relates or what you are trying to say.


About Putin. He just a human. He was President of too much difficult country. President of Russia in too much difficult period. He just choose the way. We understand this way and support young President. Now we have paradox ideology, hybrid of democracy and communism, but it is better then be zero in democracy. Now we can be Someone, it is not so bad! Putin just use old soviet instruments to rule weak Russia. Now we are much stronger. It is the result. You can destroy everything, control mineral resources and build democracy in Russia. But people is happy now. We was a superstrong country and in th one hour we stand nothing. I'm not surprised about overwhelming majority of Russians support Putin.

Have you read Animal Farm? I suggest you read it. You were only a super-strong country in image for quite a while. You filled the bottom of your feeding troughs with sand before placing a thin layer of feed on top to make them look ever full.

The instruments that Putin is using are useful, and they do quell dissidents and help restore order, but they are the same instruments that were misused and caused the downfall of your country. THAT is where caution should be used.


About "tzar" and Putin. He will never stand tzar. He is really good man. And he need some rest. 8 years of difficult work deserve by the some respect. May be he will never stand President again, but he will always welcome after 4 years.

You seem to be getting closer to what I was asking for, more of a discourse on the topic rather than a "you do not know anything" tirade where the issues are lost to a bunch of people yelling at each other saying "Do too!" "Do not!".

What we try to discuss here are the good and bad points of different world isues. And because we point out a bad portion it does not mean we are calling him Satan. He is obviously an intelligent and tallented individual, but some of the things he is doing threaten the one good thing you got from the former Union falling.

Individual liberty and Freedom of Information.

bobrik
October 20th, 2006, 04:20 PM
Putin has closed foreign radio? :D :D :D
Such а bad boy!
Guys you are fanatics...

WebErr
October 20th, 2006, 05:05 PM
Ninjahedge (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=2714)
I'm not alone, but I'm one of not much Russian, who can understand English. We thinking too diferent, this shown in our languages. It is shown in ideology difference of all XX century. It is.

If you listen to our tactics, we could learn your army how to win in war against terrorism, but your government choose the way of oil and war with regime of Saddam. Afganistan was good idea, it was the lair of terrorism. Like Chechnya in 199x. We support this way and victory was very easy. If everything would be so conformance, we could break any barrier together.

No I did not ever read this book. I never see it in Russian and never read in English. But I read "Muha-Tsokotuha" and "Aybolit". :)

I'm not a judge for all world, I just trying to be objective, when tell this or that.

Individual liberty and Freedom of Information is not panacea. And must be balanced by the Low and Order, Self Responsibility and Conscience.
Democracy is the Power of Nation, but any Power corrupt Power Keeper. In this case, corrupt all nation. It is reason to limit yourself by some communistical principles, what balanced Power of Nation and Power of Government by Balanced Dialogue.

bobrik (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=8589)
Forget it, you can not explain. They thinking different. All their life they fighting for the Freedom and Independance. They forgot about The Great Balance and about The Golden Middle. But it is their way while this fighting is outside our country.

MrSpice
October 20th, 2006, 05:10 PM
Individual liberty and Freedom of Information is not panacea. And must be balanced by the Low and Order, Self Responsibility and Conscience.
Democracy is the Power of Nation, but any Power corrupt Power Keeper. In this case, corrupt all nation. It is reason to limit yourself by some communistical principles, what balanced Power of Nation and Power of Government by Balanced Dialogue.

This coming from someone who lives in Russia - a country where there's no Law and no Order. Russia is one of the most corrupt, disorganized and least transparent countries in the world. It has some of the most restrictive and convoluted visa laws. You really need to travel a bit and see the world. By all objective measures, Russia is far behind the West in all respects.

MrSpice
October 20th, 2006, 05:20 PM
When it comes to corruption and transparency, Russia is in good company - Nepal and Uganda got a better score:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html

Doing business in Russia is not easy either:

http://www.doingbusiness.org/ExploreEconomies/Default.aspx?economyid=159

The same indicators for United States:
http://www.doingbusiness.org/ExploreEconomies/Default.aspx?economyid=197

bobrik
October 20th, 2006, 05:22 PM
I hope they can understand a simple thing. Everyone know that when USA shouts about democracy. It means that they want more favourable contracts. :confused:

bobrik
October 20th, 2006, 05:26 PM
And who writes these diagrams? :) ;)
Mr. you have a letter

lofter1
October 20th, 2006, 06:09 PM
Afganistan was good idea, it was the lair of terrorism. Like Chechnya in 199x. We support this way and victory was very easy.

OMG -- I can't believe you actually wrote and maybe believe that, given the Soviet failure in Afghanistan.

Oh, right Soviet state has nothing to do with Russia.

Not even Putin -- but he was never Soviet, right?

bobrik
October 20th, 2006, 06:17 PM
Oh, the USSR... Where a you? It would be possible to make such a
Good circus in Afghanistan and Iraq. :rolleyes:

lofter1
October 21st, 2006, 08:03 PM
Rice Criticizes Russia’s Limits on News Media


nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/world/europe/22rice.html?hp&ex=1161489600&en=28009156c59d51fa&ei=5094&partner=homepage)
By THOM SHANKER
October 22, 2006


MOSCOW, Oct. 21 — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized shrinking Russian press freedoms, questioned the enforcement of a restrictive new law on foreign private groups here and called for eased tensions between Russia and neighboring Georgia when she arrived here Saturday to discuss the North Korean nuclear crisis with Kremlin officials.


Ms. Rice’s remarks raised the possibility of a testy atmosphere for the discussions in Moscow, the last stop of her pan-Asia trip aimed at urging tough enforcement of the Security Council sanctions imposed on North Korea a week ago in response to its Oct. 9 underground nuclear test.


In a symbolic decision that no doubt will be scrutinized by the Kremlin leadership, Ms. Rice invited senior editors of Novaya Gazeta, a leading independent journal, to a meeting at her hotel, a session that included the son of the assassinated journalist Anna Politkovskaya, before she headed into official government meetings.


Earlier, Ms. Rice said that the future of a free Russian press and electronic media “is a major concern” of the United States government.


“There is still an independent print press,” she said. “Unfortunately, there is not much left of independent television in Russia.”


Ms. Politkovskaya, shot to death this month in what appeared to be a professional killing, had made a name for herself with tough reporting on the war in Chechnya, and was a fierce critic of the administration of President Vladimir V. Putin.


Mr. Putin, who was to meet with Ms. Rice not long after her session with Ms. Politkovskaya’s colleagues and the journalist’s son, Ilya Politkovsky, has described the killing as “a crime of loathsome brutality,” but also said that “her influence on political life was extremely insignificant in scale.”


Ms. Rice told correspondents traveling aboard her plane that she also would ask Russian leaders to explain the enforcement of a new law that requires foreign nongovernmental organizations to register with the government. The deadline for registration was last Thursday, and dozens of the groups, many of them highly critical of the Kremlin, were told to cease operations until their registration applications had been processed. How long that will take is unclear.


“In some cases it is being implemented in ways that are making it difficult for NGO’s to operate and so I think we have to go over that,” Ms. Rice said.


A senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity in accordance with diplomatic protocol, said later Saturday that three organizations at the center of the debate — the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace — had successfully registered. Even so, the official said, the United States still sees no guarantee that “Russia will not abuse this law and this process.”


As she began a day of meetings that was to include lunch with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and a dinner with Defense Minister Sergei B. Ivanov, Ms. Rice said she planned to urge Moscow to reduce any chance for increasing conflict with neighboring Georgia. Simmering Russia-Georgia animosity escalated this month after Georgia detained four Russian military personnel for suspected espionage.


The senior State Department official described Ms. Rice’s discussions with Mr. Lavrov on Georgia as “constructive.” The official added: “I’m not here to tell you that all will be well. I’m here to tell you we had a good conversation” on potential steps to help ease tensions between the two countries.


On North Korea, Ms. Rice cast doubts on South Korean press reports that the North’s leader, Kim Jong-il, had expressed regret to a visiting Chinese envoy for ordering the nuclear test and had pledged not to detonate another nuclear device.


Ms. Rice said she was given no information to confirm those press reports during her talks in Beijing on Friday and said she believed the North Koreans “would like to see an escalation of the tension.”


During her talks in Moscow, Ms. Rice said, she also intended to discuss efforts to halt not only North Korea’s nuclear program, but Iran’s.


Russia has been reluctant to agree to tough trade sanctions on Iran, with which it has a lucrative financial relationship.


Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

WebErr
October 22nd, 2006, 06:39 AM
This coming from someone who lives in Russia - a country where there's no Law and no Order. Russia is one of the most corrupt, disorganized and least transparent countries in the world. It has some of the most restrictive and convoluted visa laws. You really need to travel a bit and see the world. By all objective measures, Russia is far behind the West in all respects.
Read more about Russia in your press. It better then to come and travell to Russia. No Law, No Order. I don't know really nothing about us. Read more...

No Law, No Order...

About diagram, I already see that. May be better for you go to Uganda then Russia, but really I don't think so. Exactly this is again your freedom press. As well as always.

lofter1
Afganistan stand terroristic country after USSR forces go out from there.
When USA and satellites come again to Afganistan it was a great solution.
But listen, Afganistan was never be a state of USSR.
About skinheads it is come with democracy.
About Putin, who work in USSR, I lived in USSR and this is normal. Country exist for living there, work there. Now we are Russia, we are not USSR.

lofter1
October 22nd, 2006, 10:35 AM
I understand that Russia is no longer the USSR ...

Regarding Afghanistan: You wrote: Afghanistan was good idea ... victory was very easy.

My reply was that Afghanistan was not an "easy' victory for USSR 20 years ago, is not "easy" for the US now (and was not "easy" for the Brits 100 years ago).

The fight there continues, the Taliban is re-grouping, Bin Laden remains hidden.

Would Russia find it an "easy" victory in Afghanistan today?

If so, then I say send in the Russian troops and together let's get the job done.

If the following INFO (http://english.people.com.cn/200306/19/eng20030619_118499.shtml) from 2003 is not correct, please advise:

Russia Not to Send Peacekeepers to Iraq,
Afghanistan: Defense Minister

Russia (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/russia.html)n Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov on Wednesday ruled out the possibility of Russian troops' participation in peacekeeping operations in Iraq (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/iraq.html) and Afghanistan (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/afghanistan.html), Russian news agencies reported.

"Even having a vivid imagination, I cannot imagine our military performing peacekeeping functions in Iraq," Ivanov was quoted as saying, adding that Russia will not send a peacekeeping contingent to Afghanistan.

"Russia sends its peacekeepers only when the UN gives an appropriate mandate," he noted.

However, the defense minister stressed Russia's intention to establish new military bases abroad.

"We have plans to create new military bases abroad, including in Kyrgyzstan (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/kyrgyzstan.html)," he said. "This is above all aimed at ensuring our national security interests."

Russian troops are now stationed in all the member countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the former Soviet republics.

Commenting on Russian peacekeeping troops' withdrawal from the Balkans, Ivanov said it did not mean that Moscow lost its interest in the region.

"We will be present in the Balkans as part of a police force and will also work in the interests of the region through diplomatic means," he explained.

Russia decided to pull out its peacekeeping forces from the Balkans earlier this year. So far, Russia has withdrawn its peacekeepers from Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Russian peacekeepers stationed in Kosovo are due to pull out by the end of July.

MrSpice
October 22nd, 2006, 12:12 PM
Read more about Russia in your press. It better then to come and travell to Russia. No Law, No Order. I don't know really nothing about us. Read more...

No Law, No Order...

About diagram, I already see that. May be better for you go to Uganda then Russia, but really I don't think so. Exactly this is again your freedom press. As well as always.



I told you that I was in Russia last June.

WebErr
October 22nd, 2006, 04:08 PM
MrSpice
And? Someone killer come to You and shot to your back twice?
How long you was found in Russia? One mounth? Two mounth?
May be your child study in Russian school?
By the way, you could see any TV-Channel in Russian TV... ?
Order must be completed by Individual Responsibility and supported by Law, not completed by Law. We have more freedom then you, because we live in free country from any propaganda. You can read any in your "freedom" press, who controlled by your government and satellite financial companies-giants.
We free! We really free! Some go crazy after taken this freedom and stand criminal or nationalist, but now we are the ourself! Noone press can take us! We know style of any propaganda! Let's come and take us... if they can! :)
Read more... in your press... or in objective analitics press. Just know more! ;) Knowledge is mental freedom! :) Know more! :)

lofter1
And what do you want now after pseudo-revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia? Now we stand by the opposite sides and start our current match without ideology problem. Almost... ;)
But don't really believe your press, it is propaganda, this way going to hate.

bobrik
October 22nd, 2006, 04:18 PM
Do you really think what we did not read yours newspapers?

Please. can you speak about democracy to China?
It is necessary to take away California at USA... :mad: And then, will be possible to tell - (USA go home from California! ) :D

And if Russia will give some billions for struggle poor... California from USA? :confused:
And if Russia will give some billions for revolt against the bloody government of America? :confused:
And only try to close ours NGO :eek: I will give you the reference at yours newspapers:D :D :D

bobrik
October 22nd, 2006, 04:24 PM
Mr.... Where is your answer? We so well spoke :p :D

lofter1
October 22nd, 2006, 05:06 PM
Will Russia send troops to fight for "easy" victory in Afghanistan?

bobrik
October 22nd, 2006, 05:26 PM
USA grasp petroleum and influence and we should help for you?
Why?

lofter1
October 22nd, 2006, 11:18 PM
Because it's so "easy" -- we could do it like friends: save the world and share the spoils.

MrSpice
October 22nd, 2006, 11:49 PM
MrSpice
And? Someone killer come to You and shot to your back twice?
How long you was found in Russia? One mounth? Two mounth?
May be your child study in Russian school?
By the way, you could see any TV-Channel in Russian TV... ?
Order must be completed by Individual Responsibility and supported by Law, not completed by Law. We have more freedom then you, because we live in free country from any propaganda. You can read any in your "freedom" press, who controlled by your government and satellite financial companies-giants.
We free! We really free! Some go crazy after taken this freedom and stand criminal or nationalist, but now we are the ourself! Noone press can take us! We know style of any propaganda! Let's come and take us... if they can! :)
Read more... in your press... or in objective analitics press. Just know more! ;) Knowledge is mental freedom! :) Know more! :)


You're posts are getting more and more ridiculous, to be perfectly honest.

I was not shot, the crime statistics in St Petersburg is pretty bad. And the police (milizia) is notorious for extortions and bribes. I also walked all over the city. Once you get out of the city center, it gets pretty unpleasant, especially at night. Lives of most ordinary people is terrible in everything - from medical care to getting any kind of opportunity. The economy is getting better (mostly because of huge oil and gas revenues), but it's a very small percentage of people that have decent life by any standard.

In just 6 months, 434 people were killed in St Petersburg. That's abour 1.5 as much as killed in New York, city that has 8.2 million residents:
http://www.fontanka.ru/170979

http://www.fontanka.ru/163744

And I had to register my visa and carry my passport with me. I visited dozens of countries - nowhere else there's such a ridiculous rule.

Regarding schools - I studied in a Russian school. I was born in St Petersburg. I still have many of my old friends there that have children. I don't know what schools have to do with it. I went to my old school where I studied when I was a child. It's in a very bad shape. The building is dirty and there's garbage lying around.


Saying that you have more freedom than we do here in the US tells me 2 things:
1) You really know nothing about the United States. You should come here, travel the country, learn more about US history, economic and political system and you will understand that any ordinary citizen like me has way more rights that any citizen of Russia ever hopes to have. There are thousands of totally independent magazines, newspapers, university publications, student newspapers, etc. If you feel that New York Times is propaganda, you can read thousands of other newspapers or magazines with alternative point of view.
2) Just 2 hours ago I watched Russian Channel 1 (Первый Канал). It's nothing but propaganda. Again, it looks like Soviet TV was in the 80s. It's sad to watch.

WebErr
October 23rd, 2006, 02:04 AM
lofter1 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=4502)
You make a good step to Afganistan. Taliban was supported by your secret forces when USSR came there in 198x and feel strength under USA support. Now they must know, terrorism will always be punished! You make a great thing, when going there and clear this lair.
About Iraq... it is your way, I don't want to be involve in your economics plans.

bobrik (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=8589)
Relax, guy. Be calm and very careful in your words. You're representative of Russia here.

MrSpice (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=4502)
I know about St. Pitersburg, it is lair of corruption and criminal groups. It is a center of Shadow Russia. If you want to hear my meaning: I don't want to travel to St. Pitersburg, never! It is a very beautiful city, but a very dark inside. Problem #1 in St. Piterburg is corruption of militzia (police). You choose very interesting Place to travel in Russia. I know, it is historical capital of Russia, but now this city have a very bad times. If God give our strength we will clear our Historical capital from any criminal sh.. and restore order in militzia.
You have a very bad example in the front of eyes. I live in Yaroslavl. Here is silent and we living in Law and Order, Free and Safe.

P.S. Yesterday I watching on NTV (Russia) online questioning of Medvedev (politican, vice-premier). You should see that. No mercy. But Medvedev protect his politic position very smart and look very self-reliance.
Oh... I forgot, we have not free TV... :)

P.S.2. Yesterday first snow fall to Yaroslavl... Very beautiful... Winter coming soon... :)

Ninjahedge
October 23rd, 2006, 11:01 AM
If you listen to our tactics, we could learn your army how to win in war against terrorism

You mean lik ethat one time where terrorists had taken hostage in a church and your men attacked with tear gas and whatnot and ended up killing a good number of the hostages?

Umm hmm. There is a balance between fearing foreign aggressors and fearing the guys who are supposed to be protecting you.

Ninjahedge
October 23rd, 2006, 11:16 AM
Oh, the USSR... Where a you? It would be possible to make such a
Good circus in Afghanistan and Iraq. :rolleyes:

Um, so the fact that our invasion in Iraq has drawn troops away from Afghanistan and let them revert back to tribal feudalism makes it so we cannot comment on the soviet failure years ago?

Come on!

It is like saying a fat person cannot say that another is fat. We both did not handle it correctly. The difference is, we are not afraid to say our government did not handle it right. You, on the other hand, seem to have some sort of reluctance to admit any fault of failure of your government.


Are they watching? Or are you just that unwilling to look around for yourself?

Yatkee
October 23rd, 2006, 05:35 PM
Hello to all respected Americans. I am very sorry for my verdammt ugly English, I have studied it more than 6 years ago at school. I speak German much better, nearly prefect, but i do have great doubts, that someone here understands this heavenly language.

I have read all the messages here and have something to add. As you know, dear Amis, there are millions of asteroids flying through the Solar System in the space blackness. If a little stone, not greater than 6 km (~3.4 miles) in diameter - that's really tiny, falls on the earth, all the ****ing civilization will be total destroyed. Noone stays alive, even the respected Americans.

But we stay, we - The Russians. We have something behind the forehead what has been called "mother wit". This capacity helps us every day. We may be not the cleverest, not the reachest or so, we are just the best.

I am proud to be born as Russian, auch wenn ich eine riesige Begeisterung f&#252;r Deutschland hege und das jetzige Volk meistens f&#252;r das Vieh halte. Russians have ****ed the Mongols 526 years ago, ****ed Napoleon and Hitler. And we shall **** you regardless of your "mighty power". I do not hate you, i do not hate America, as I do not hate Germans. This is foolish to hate an entire nation. I am just warning you against a stupidity, as it was warned Adolf Schickelgruber 65 years ago.

To all who thinks we were wrong with Chechnya: just go there and live there a pair months :o) After your balls will be cut, you understand everything.

Thanks for attention. Have a nice day and a big fat BigMack on the table.

God, defend the USA.

And the stone is already on the way...

Edward
October 23rd, 2006, 06:02 PM
This thread does not seem to go anywhere; perhaps I should rename it "adolescent ramblings" and move it to Anything Goes.

One more moronic post like the last one and I am closing the thread.

MrSpice
October 23rd, 2006, 07:26 PM
Do you really think what we did not read yours newspapers?

Please. can you speak about democracy to China?
It is necessary to take away California at USA... :mad: And then, will be possible to tell - (USA go home from California! ) :D

And if Russia will give some billions for struggle poor... California from USA? :confused:
And if Russia will give some billions for revolt against the bloody government of America? :confused:
And only try to close ours NGO :eek: I will give you the reference at yours newspapers:D :D :D

See "Private Messages"

WebErr
October 24th, 2006, 06:18 AM
Please, don't close this thread.
I'm not said enough about my point of view.

P.S. This thread begin to be popular... ;)

Ninjahedge
October 24th, 2006, 09:06 AM
Yatkee:

OK, that was stupid and inflamatory.

So you have a magical thing behind your skull that allows you to see things that will somehow have something to do with asteroids that may destroy the earth and make Americans eat Big Macs.

Jeez man, you are really tripping. :rolleyes:


And yes Ed, I agre with you. This "discussion" has teetered no the edge of logical discourse about Russia and the perceptions and misperceptions of its actions and a few natives that are trying to be both victims (US people are stupid for saying we are stupid even though they have not said we are, but we think they have....) and almost sports-fan like supporters of their nation (Russia #1, etc...).

MrSpice has been a little more combative in his stance, but most of us here have tried to talk with these guys about these things, but it still seems to cmoe back to the same old reheating of the cold war (irony and pun intended).

So whatever. If it does continue, move it. Maybe we can start another thread here hat has more to do with Russian issues rather than an almost Bush-supporter like defense of Mother Russia.

lofter1
October 24th, 2006, 09:13 AM
Maybe this is what will get us ...

Nova: Magnetic Storm (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/schedule-local.html?title_id=71&display_format=ep_description&display_feed=2609&display_date=2006-10-24&display_time=20:00&feeds=&station=WNET&zipcode=10012&transport=&provider=&channelsuppress=f)

Tuesday, October 24, 8:00pm
PBS / WNET Channel 13
A look at the “fading” of Earth's magnetic field.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/magnetic/images/magnetic-home.jpg

Like the plot of a sci-fi B movie, something weird is happening deep underground where the constant spin of Earth's liquid metallic core generates an invisible magnetic force field that shields our planet from harmful radiation in space. Gradually, the field is growing weaker.

Could we be heading for a demagnetized doomsday that will leave us defenseless against the lethal effects of solar wind and cosmic rays? "Magnetic Storm" looks into our potentially unsettling magnetic future.

incognito
October 24th, 2006, 12:30 PM
I happened to find out of this discussion from WebErr. I also happened to hang out on the same forum as WebErr and Yatkee, for the reason that we're from the same russian town. The difference is, that I live in the States, and hopefully are able to get more to the point with more appropriate usage of english. :)

I tend to agree that this discussion may lead nowhere in its current form. Most of it is about the tone (often inflamatory) that is used by the guys from Russia. Poor english only adds more to that. I would say though, the other side is no angel either.

The discussion is interesting however in how both sides are protective. The other thing is that after living in the States for more than 10 years I am able to take the stand and protect any side's views, with appropriate arguments and appropriate examples.

I would like this thread to continue for a little while, if I can have any word on that.

Yatkee
October 24th, 2006, 02:37 PM
So you have a magical thing behind your skull that allows you to see things that will somehow have something to do with asteroids that may destroy the earth and make Americans eat Big Macs.

Nice speech, I must answer - yes, we have it :-). I admit, my last message was really "moronic", it has been written after a long night I was calculating an exact photon propagator.. So I apologize to all who has taken my words too seriously.

But nevertheless, I have an counter-question. Imagine that the USA has conquered the whole world. What will you doing then??? :-) I think, the USA will suffer soon the same fate as the Roman's Empire or Empire of Mongols...
Where are they now?

As conserns the asteroids or another things, remember the flood destroyed New Orleans - you couldn't do anything against it... The mankind is too delicate to exist eternally. So let us live in the peace!

lofter1
October 24th, 2006, 02:43 PM
I agree ^^^ let us ALL live in peace.

We have an election in the USA in 2 weeks -- if Americans are fortunate there will be a shift of power away from those who seem determined to lead the US down the road formerly taken by imperialists.

Mankind has a LOT of work to do if we want this planet to sustain us in coming generations.

WebErr
October 24th, 2006, 02:55 PM
Oh, my... Russian invasion... Red Alert!!! :D

Wait for tommorow, I have a thing what you need to see... ;)

Ninjahedge
October 24th, 2006, 03:24 PM
Nice speech, I must answer - yes, we have it :-). I admit, my last message was really "moronic", it has been written after a long night I was calculating an exact photon propagator.. So I apologize to all who has taken my words too seriously.

A light gate?

(PS, Engineer here, so try to keep it real. We are all not out to impress on this site).


But nevertheless, I have an counter-question. Imagine that the USA has conquered the whole world.

Don't want to. I would rather like it if the world was a bunch of independent nations that had similar, although not the same governmental policies. It would make it like a RAID array (hopefully). That if one of those systems goes down, the others can back it up and get it running again but ALL the systems do not need to have the same stuff stored on them... ;)


What will you doing then??? :-) I think, the USA will suffer soon the same fate as the Roman's Empire or Empire of Mongols...
Where are they now?

I don't think I, a lowly engineer stuck in the quickly vanishing Middle Class, clawing his way to try to get above the rim before he canyon becomes larger, well be doing anything.

As for empires, I know you are right on that. the CCCP failed with that using a more stringent doctrine, and the US will fail if it tries the same, but with different methods.


As conserns the asteroids or another things, remember the flood destroyed New Orleans - you couldn't do anything against it... The mankind is too delicate to exist eternally. So let us live in the peace!

I know, I was being sarcastic. But shouting "The sky is falling" (Look up "chicken little" for the reference) is not a good way to back up a political discussion. Especially if no-one was talking about the sky, the land below it, or anything in between. ;)

Soooooooooo....

One thing you have to learn when posting on here is that this is a rather friendly website. Unless you start badmouthing someone directly or being a wise guy (meaning a trouble maker) in which case you will meet with resistance.

And I agree with your friend a few posts back. You were coming off rather belligerent and the language difference added to the problem. So, just be careful about it and we will get along just fine.

Also realize that when we criticize things that your government is doing, we are not criticizing all of Russia and its people. We know that you are individuals and should be treated as such. Also realize that we are ready to criticize our own leaders in the same fashion if we do not agree with what they are doing.

It is a little different than what you may be used to, but I think you will get it if you read around the forums a bit...

MrSpice
October 24th, 2006, 04:07 PM
Nice speech, I must answer - yes, we have it :-). I admit, my last message was really "moronic", it has been written after a long night I was calculating an exact photon propagator.. So I apologize to all who has taken my words too seriously.

But nevertheless, I have an counter-question. Imagine that the USA has conquered the whole world. What will you doing then??? :-) I think, the USA will suffer soon the same fate as the Roman's Empire or Empire of Mongols...
Where are they now?


I don't think the US has any desire or ability to conquer even the small part of this world. The only country where the US forces are stationed en masse is Iraq. And most Americans can't wait for our forces to leave that country. It's only a question of when.

bobrik
October 24th, 2006, 11:24 PM
NINJAHEDGE
How you can mix idle talk about a politics and death of people?
You are ugly creature. I would like to see, how yours boys take out 1200 person, for 10 minutes. You really have so much hatred? I did saw a machine gun on entrance and a dead criminal. I did saw that every gangster has received a bullet in a forehead. It was in a smoke, it was in gas masks. Even yours stupid Hollywood could not think up how to neutralize so much person with fingers on buttons.
I did read newspapers of USA, its mixed with a dirty ours soldier from ALPHA which were died in Beslan. They closed children owns bodies. But I could not believe that simple people in USA can speak such dirty.

bobrik
October 24th, 2006, 11:55 PM
I think it is necessary to close this stupid thread.

WebErr
October 25th, 2006, 02:14 AM
Alexander Kashin vs. the US Government


By Mark Grueter

http://www.exile.ru/2006-October-20/alexander_Kashin_vs_the_us_government.html

For those not familiar with the case of Alexander Kashin vs. Douglas Barry Kent, let me give you a quick rundown. On October 27, 1998 then US Consulate General in Vladivostok, Doug Kent, smashed his SUV into a car carrying 23 year old Alexander Kashin in downtown Vlad. Kashin was paralyzed from the neck down and will spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair.
Witnesses and police allege that Kent blew three traffic lights leading up to the accident, came out of the car laughing and appeared to be drunk. Kent then fled the scene to a nearby club, Nautilus. The owner of Nautilus confirmed this and further noted that Kent had a grand old time after the crash, taking down the panties of a stripper with his teeth. The guy's got balls, you have to give him that much.

Once word got out about this, outrage was expressed in the local media, so the United States government removed Kent from Vlad. He left without forking over a penny to Kashin and was re-assigned by the State Department. Kent and the US ignored Kashin's pleas for help in paying medical bills.
Enter John Gallagher, a Philadelphia-based attorney who in 2000 took on Kashin's case pro bono. Gallagher spent over $200,000 on private investigators just trying to find Kent, who was eventually located at an apartment complex in Arlington, Virginia. Kent was hard to find because he used several false names (in an obvious attempt to elude the hammer of justice). He even had a phony name on the lease of his apartment. They found Kent after he carelessly used his real name at a local dry cleaner. He was served a subpoena and the case of Kashin vs. Kent was filed in US courts.
Gallagher flew to Vlad to investigate the matter and got sworn affidavits from five eye-witnesses indicting Kent. The State Department countered by shifting Kent to a series of overseas assignments ranging from Panama to Liberia, as opposed to, say, firing him. Kent's attorneys filed six separate motions to dismiss the case, to no avail. By and by, it was determined that Kent was "acting within the scope of employment" during the accident and is therefore protected under diplomatic immunity. Of course! And since that's the decision, Kashin is essentially ****ed because foreigners aren't allowed to sue the State Department.

So eight years later while medical bills mount, the paraplegic Alexander Kashin still hasn't received a thin dime from either Kent or the US government. Gallagher and his team estimate the total damages at $10 million. "What shocks me in this case," says Gallagher "is that after the use of diplomatic immunity the United States wouldn't make provisions for the medical attention we were obviously responsible for."
But I'm not shocked. It sounds pretty typical of the callous, indifferent and evil old US of A I've come to know. Gallagher points out the blatant hypocrisy of the American government, when in 1997 it forced Georgia to remove diplomatic immunity for a diplomat who had killed a woman while drunk driving. The Georgian diplomat was prosecuted in America and spent five years in jail.
The Kashin case is an example of why people around the world hate America. We lecture others about justice and freedom but refuse to take seriously those principles ourselves. Most people can figure this out for themselves, but Americans will never get it. What I've learned since being back in the US is that the place is a communications vacuum. Anything that happens outside of America doesn't really happen unless it's acknowledged by the media or government. Liberals and conservatives are of equal guilt, and what's funny is that they just don't know any better. Supposedly progressive New York media and ridiculous websites like The Huffington Post don't realize how absolutely parochial and self-obsessed they are. If a bit of news has no obvious connection to the Democratic Party, you won't see it on The Huffington Post. If you tell a New Yorker that they mispronounce Maria Sharapova's name or that North Korea didn't actually test a nuclear weapon you'll get nothing but a completely blank, stupid look.
What kind of country shelters and protects a dirtbag like Doug Kent? The kind that kicks the living shit out of civilians all over the world in order to recklessly pursue its own perceived interests, that's what kind -- America. The truth is, the US and its representatives believe they can do just about anything they want and get away with it -- because it's all done in the name of freedom and of fighting fascism -- especially in an outback like Vlad where they can dismiss the locals as savages. We assert moral superiority over the rest of the world in a phony "war on terrorism" when we obviously have none. The civilized world, to the extent that is exists, is laughing at us.
This past August, the wheelchair-ridden Kashin approached US ambassador to Russia William Burns -- who was in Vlad on a PR tour -- to beg for help. A confused Burns -- who had clearly never heard of the disgusting affair -- promised Kashin he'd put in a word for him at the State Department. Does anyone believe that for a second?
Late Note: As of going to print, the FBI raided John Gallagher's office in Philly as part of the move against his friend, Sen. Curt Weldon. How convenient for Kent.
___________________



P.S. Free press? In Russia? Free from what goverment?

ZippyTheChimp
October 25th, 2006, 07:08 AM
I think it is necessary to close this stupid thread.
I wonder who's the cause of that?


When first opened, I thought the title, "Why you hate us," referred to the alleged hatred of Americans toward Russians. But after weeks of rambling dialogue, the only conclusion I can draw is that the premise is backward - should be "Why we hate you."

Moving this to Anything Goes. Next stop is the Trash Can.

WebErr
October 25th, 2006, 07:49 AM
It is Wave-of-Answer. Say "Thank You" to your politicans, who control your "free press".

WebErr
October 25th, 2006, 08:21 AM
THE HUNGRY BEAR
PART 5: Russia, China 'cooking something up'
By W Joseph Stroupe

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI29Ag01.html


(For Part 1, Promises that can't be kept, click here (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI23Ag01.html).
For Part 2, Corporate gigantism, click here (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI26Ag01.html).
For Part 3, No more Mr Nice Guy, click here (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI27Ag01.html).
For Part 4, The West's thorny crown, click here (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HI28Ag01.html) )

Russian President Vladimir Putin was asked about Russia-China relations and the mounting regional/global clout of the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization). He expressed great

http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adview.php?what=zone:117&n=a923457d (http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adclick.php?n=a923457d)

satisfaction and excitement about the path of Russia-China relations, but quickly denied that the two strategic partners were involved in "cooking anything up between themselves".

In fact, he claimed that the mounting regional and global clout of the SCO has never been planned for or intentionally striven for by the two partners, that it has entirely happened "by surprise". And, of course, he claimed once again that neither the SCO nor the deepening Russia-China strategic partnership was "aimed at the US or NATO" (North Atlantic Treaty Organization).

But contrary to Putin's soothing assurances to the West at the recent Valdai Club meeting, Russia and China most certainly do have "something in the geopolitical oven", and it has been cooking steadily for nearly a decade. In fact, their geopolitical main course is practically ready to be served to the table, so to speak, and directly contrary to Putin's recent claims they both intended from the beginning for the SCO eventually to play a significant role.

One only has to read the Sino-Russian Joint Statements from 1997 forward to see that the two partners embarked on a carefully conceived and adroitly executed geopolitical course and strategy a decade ago, and they have made tremendous progress toward the achievement of the specific goal they set way back then. Note these facts and precisely what their goal has been in the excerpts and commentary that follow:

From the Sino-Russian Joint Statement of April 23, 1997:
The two sides shall, in the spirit of partnership, strive to promote the multipolarization of the world and the establishment of a new international order.

The establishment of a just and equitable new international political and economic order based on peace and stability has become the pressing need of the times and the inevitable necessity of history.

All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. No country should seek hegemony, practice power politics or monopolize international affairs.

Both sides express concern over the attempt at enlarging and strengthening military blocs, because such a tendency may pose a threat to the security of certain countries and aggravate regional and global tension.

Both sides underscore that the vast member of developing countries and the Non-Aligned Movement are important forces in promoting world multipolarization and building a new international order.

Developing countries have enhanced their awareness of self-strengthening through unity, played a greater role in world politics and increased their share of the world economy.

Their rise will give a strong boost to the historical process towards the establishment of a new international order. [Emphasis added] From "PRC, Russia leaders issue joint statement", December 10, 1999:
[The two sides] propose to push forward the establishment of a multipolar world on the basis of the principles of the United Nations Charter and existing international laws in the 21st century, strengthen the UN's dominant status in international affairs, and peacefully resolve international disputes through political means ... and establish a fair, equal, and mutually beneficial international political and economic order. Third, the two sides point out that negative momentum in international relations continues to grow, and the following is becoming more obvious: The forcing of the international community to accept a unipolar world pattern and a single model of culture, value concepts and ideology, and a weakening of the role of the United Nations and its Security Council; the seeking of excuses to give irresponsible explanations or amendment to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter; the reinforcing and expanding of military blocs; the replacing of international law with power politics or even resorting to force; and the jeopardizing of the sovereignty of independent states using the concepts of "human rights are superior to sovereignty" and "humanitarian intervention".

The two sides agree to work together with the rest of the world to oppose the momentum presently preventing the establishment of a just multipolar structure for international relations.

Seventh, the two countries express their satisfaction with the implementation of the Bishkek Declaration issued by the summit of China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, known as the "Shanghai Five States", on August 25, 1999.

In line with the Sino-Russian equal and trustworthy strategic partnership of cooperation, the two sides are willing to strengthen their cooperation, considering that the two countries share similar or identical views on such issues as the establishment of an international multipolar order and democracy and justice in international affairs. [Emphasis added] From the China-Russia Joint Statement of July 1, 2005:
Strictly abiding by the propositions on building a multipolar world and a new international order as enunciated in the Joint Statement of the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation Regarding Global Multipolarity and the Establishment of a New International Order of April 23, 1997,

The international community should thoroughly renounce the mentality of confrontation and alignment, should not pursue the right to monopolize or dominate world affairs, and should not divide countries into a leading camp and a subordinate camp.

In the sphere of regional security, the establishment of security cooperation mechanisms that take into account the interests of all parties, are open, and are not directed at other countries has fundamental significance. [Emphasis added] Look at the declarations
The ultimate target of deepening Russian-Chinese strategic cooperation is clearly the pushing toward the establishment of what they call the "multipolar world order" to end US global dominance. The joint statements above prove that fact beyond any reasonable doubt whatever.

Consequently, the repeated claims by the two that no "third country" is being targeted amount only to pure diplomatic indirection and propaganda. The US most certainly is being targeted. You cannot push to establish a new international order to end dominance by one power without simultaneously targeting the one power that currently has that domination - namely, the United States itself. However, the targeting being done by Russia, China and their global partners isn't that of directly hitting the US economy to sink it, or of directly attacking the US military in a confrontation.

The targeting of the US global position of dominance is much smarter than that. It is indirect targeting, in which US economic, political and even military dominance and power are undermined and weakened by virtue of the creation of a deepening and widening global complex of strategic resources-based economic, political and military ties, a complex that is centered in the East rather than looking to the US as center, and a complex that mostly disregards, and increasingly rivals, US interests.

That strategy of ending US global dominance by pushing for "multipolarity", not directly confronting the US but rather building a non-US-centric global complex, works because the US is able to dominate the globe only because the world at large permits it to do so and either actively or indirectly facilitates such dominance. The US is not nearly omnipotent, politically, economically or militarily. It must dominate by virtue of willing allies and key powers that permit the US to exercise its influence through them, and by maintaining fear on the part of its rivals with respect to opposing the US in the spheres of the global economy and the military. Without the combination of willing cooperation and fearful acquiescence on the part of the world at large, the US will tumble from its global position of dominance.

Russia and China have correctly calculated, therefore, that if they can undermine that willing cooperation and fearful acquiescence by turning enough of the globe's key states away from a US-centric stance toward a stance more in line with their own purpose, inculcating them firmly into their own growing complex of economic, political and even military ties centered in the East, then the US will incrementally suffer ever greater political and economic isolation and subsequent weakening of its leverage and position on the world stage.

At the center of the new global complex of ties is the Russia-China axis itself. That has been the strategy of the two partners since before they issued their Joint Statement of April 23, 1997 - to build a new international economic and political order that isn't US-centric, that progressively robs the US of the deep cooperation and fearful acquiescence it needs across the globe to keep it atop the current order, and that thereby cuts deeply into the US ability to continue to dominate the world order. They aren't directly confronting the US in their efforts, but make no mistake - they are powerfully targeting the US nonetheless.

The United States has inadvertently cooperated on a massive scale with Russia and China in their push to create this new order, cooperated with them in their political, ideological and economic push to isolate the US incrementally. By its policies and actions since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and especially since September 11, 2001, the US has profoundly isolated itself on the world stage. That has played, and continues to play, directly into the hands of Russia, China and their strategic partners who understand US global isolation is the key to ending US global dominance. That is the real meaning of the policies and actions undertaken by Russia, China and their partners in the lead-up to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, in which they have worked steadily to isolate the US and to keep it isolated, and to deepen its isolation. They have been very quick to capitalize on growing US isolation to construct rapidly their global complex of resources-based economic, political, ideological and security ties not centered on the US, and as rivals to the US.

Hence whenever Russian and Chinese leaders say that neither the US nor NATO is being targeted by their activities, that is an entirely facetious statement designed to give the two partners plausible deniability, in that the statement is technically true - they aren't directly hitting or confronting the US economy or military. But they most certainly are actively working to undermine the US global position by insidious, indirect and profoundly effective means. And US leaders simply aren't intelligent and humble enough to understand the effectiveness of the strategy or how they themselves are aiding in its success.

Note that in the joint statements quoted above, the two partners (Russia and China) repeatedly spoke not only of a new political order, but also of a new international economic order. Notably, in the April 23, 1997, statement the following statement was made:
Both sides underscore that the ... developing countries and the Non-Aligned Movement are important forces in promoting world multipolarization and building a new international order.

Developing countries have enhanced their awareness of self-strengthening through unity, played a greater role in world politics, and increased their share of the world economy.

Their rise will give a strong boost to the historical process towards the establishment of a new international order. [Emphasis added] It so happens that the vast bulk of the world's strategic resources are located within the very group mentioned here, the developing countries and the Non-Aligned Movement. It is not by accident that Russia and China have concentrated their efforts there, succeeding in deeply integrating those nations into their global complex of ties, and simultaneously those resource-rich nations have become ever more characterized by adoption of deeply anti-American economic, political and/or religious ideologies.

The undermining and weakening of US global economic power and dominance are key to the achievement of the goal of ending the unipolar order that is led by the United States. It is being accomplished without direct confrontation between the US and its rivals. The massive ongoing transfer of wealth from the US to its rivals and the attendant weakening of the US economy is in no small part facilitated by energy developments and the growing cohesiveness and anti-US political affinity among the globe's energy producers, who by and large disdain continued US global dominance. Additionally, entities such as the SCO are being employed to reverse US geopolitical advances in energy-rich regions by helping to close ranks among its members, further placing the strategic US economic security in a precarious position. The US has requested, but has been denied, any role whatever in the SCO, which is shaping up to be a closed entity to the West.

On September 15, RIA Novosti reported that prime ministers of SCO member countries, while gathered in Dushanbe for a key meeting, gave instructions for studies to be conducted into the establishment of a regional energy club. In June at the SCO Summit, Putin caused a stir when he proposed the creation of the energy club centered in the SCO and designed to balance the interests of producers and key consumers such as China (a key founding member of the SCO) and India (which has observer status in the SCO) in a new arrangement that would transcend the leverage of a mere axis of producers alone. That proposal appears to be taking definite shape now, with officials from Kazakhstan and Russia tasked with drafting proposals for a key meeting next year of the grouping's fuel and energy experts. The ongoing development of the SCO-centered energy club proposed by Putin in June is a development of profound importance and constitutes a major advance in the Russian effort to complete the drawing of the circle of international energy security, a circle that by and large excludes the West.

Russia and China have been "cooking something up between themselves" for at least a decade now, and the results are already dramatic, to say the least. Don't expect Russia and its partners to "play nice" with energy and other strategic resources, not in view of the colossal stakes for both sides in the Great Game and the fact that the West will stop at nothing to try to turn the Game around in its favor before the clock soon runs out.

Putin's promise that Russia will not behave like an energy superpower is a promise that cannot be kept. It is a promise the West must not give credence to or rely upon, but the West itself is partly to blame for the increasingly contentious relations between resource-rich East and resource-dependent West. The moment of truth for both sides in the Great Game and for the current global order itself is impending.

This is the final article in a five-part report.

W Joseph Stroupe is editor of Global Events Magazine, online at www.GeoStrategyMap.com. He has authored a new book on the implications of ongoing energy geopolitics, Russian Rubicon: Impending Checkmate of the West.

(Copyright 2004-06 GeoStrategyMap.com and W Joseph Stroupe. All rights reserved.)

WebErr
October 25th, 2006, 08:49 AM
For speaking Russian people will be interesting this one:
http://www.regnum.ru/news/725928.html (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=35)

Ninjahedge
October 25th, 2006, 09:25 AM
NINJAHEDGE
How you can mix idle talk about a politics and death of people?

Um, I thought you guys were the ones making light of the death of people, in particular, the death of the reporter mentioned earlier.


You are ugly creature. I would like to see, how yours boys take out 1200 person, for 10 minutes. You really have so much hatred?

Please show me where I said that. You are putting words into my mouth that I did not say and making me into a person you feel better about hating.


I did saw a machine gun on entrance and a dead criminal. I did saw that every gangster has received a bullet in a forehead. It was in a smoke, it was in gas masks. Even yours stupid Hollywood could not think up how to neutralize so much person with fingers on buttons.

The problem with ranting is that you have to think about what you are saying and put it into context before you start or you end up sounding like a schoolboy who knows nothing about the real world he is living in.

You saw that every gangster has a bullet in the forehead? What are you babbling about? Are you talking about the hostage situation where your troops did not take the safety and lives of the people inside as the most important and ended up killing some themselves in order to rescue the others?

Nice.

(Not)


I did read newspapers of USA, its mixed with a dirty ours soldier from ALPHA which were died in Beslan. They closed children owns bodies. But I could not believe that simple people in USA can speak such dirty.


You are not making any sense. Your English is mangled and you are just spewing ill-informed hate. I have no respect for you, what you are saying, or the feelings you are holding and trying to convey.

You need to become more informed before you spew your hatred on people, yes PEOPLE, individuals like myself. Your rants only have value to the people who share the same views and will not be respected by any other. You typify the xenophobic hate groups we have in the US that are deplored by most of the citizens here and I will not just stand by anymore and listen to it.

Either reign in your rants or leave. Simple as that.

Ninjahedge
October 25th, 2006, 09:29 AM
I wonder who's the cause of that?


When first opened, I thought the title, "Why you hate us," referred to the alleged hatred of Americans toward Russians. But after weeks of rambling dialogue, the only conclusion I can draw is that the premise is backward - should be "Why we hate you."

Moving this to Anything Goes. Next stop is the Trash Can.

Ironic, isn't it?

The thread itself seems more to be of proof of why we should hate guys like bobrik rather than a question of unjustified xenephobia.


Question: Why you hate us?

Answer: Because of the intolerant views and narrow perspective you evidence on this forum. "us" being the few of you that rant and spew hatred at anyone, including former native Russians, that do not agree with your views and NOT the russian people in general.

I sincerely hope that this is not the general attitude of all russians. It reminds me of the ingnorant hate groups we have in our own country that tolerate nothing that makes them question their own wort, values and opinions.


How insecure can you get?

Ninjahedge
October 25th, 2006, 09:32 AM
It is Wave-of-Answer. Say "Thank You" to your politicans, who control your "free press".

No they don't.

Companies and advertisement dollars control it more than our elected officials. Just look at our press when approval ratings for an individual are high. Most press agencies do not want to lose their readership, so they try to provide what they think their people would want to hear.

Read the book (or watch the movie) Fountainhead, by Ann Rand. It will give you a little perspective about who controls the press. It is not perfect, but it is a start.

bobrik
October 25th, 2006, 05:05 PM
I did not ask you, why your soldiers did not catch people, which jumped from skyscrapers. I did not speak that your firemen ran on ladders in skyscrapers and prevented people to leave from this building. It is meanly.
I saw filming a hall of the NORTH OST after attacks and I saw that each gangster has received a bullet in a forehead.
The group ALPHA submits only to the president of Russia. They participated in all wars of stupid cold war. In 1992, they have not obeyed to order to kill people of Russia. They have risen between people and have stopped civil war. In Beclan has died 12 soldier. In Beclan the group had biggest losses for all history. You are usual domestic talker and you do not stand even a little finger of such people.

It is meanly.

WebErr
October 26th, 2006, 02:55 AM
No they don't.

Companies and advertisement dollars control it more than our elected officials. Just look at our press when approval ratings for an individual are high. Most press agencies do not want to lose their readership, so they try to provide what they think their people would want to hear.

Read the book (or watch the movie) Fountainhead, by Ann Rand. It will give you a little perspective about who controls the press. It is not perfect, but it is a start.
They are all in one boat. Economics of US is indissoluble binded to US politics. I know just a little more then you thinking about me. :)

Do not listen bobrik too serious, he is too young for making some conclusion about everyone Russian. We mostly doesn't matter about USA and Democracy ideology. But your "free" press awaking war song in the spirit of every Russian. When you writing some sensational, thinking about consequences, please, just a bit!

Resonance of some articles can be destoyable, if ALL Russians will read that articles in Russian. We are very tolerant nation, but do not awake "sleeping bear". He just want to be in peace now and ever.

About jokes of Yetkee, he usually speaking with Germans. They have another culture. This is reason of his cruel humour. Truth to say we have very self-ironic humour too. Please forget about this and don't be offended, just understand it.

P.S. If you talking about Putin, you talking about representative of all Russians, we elect him twice and this is not random select. He have highest ratings and we will support him in any position while we trust him. Be careful when writing some like "bloody special agent Putin kill Politlovskaya". Have you any idea about justice and jurisprudence?

P.S.2. If start to tell truth, Westlands need a Weak Russia. All thats speeches about "We need Strong Russia" stand empty, when reading your press.

Ninjahedge
October 26th, 2006, 09:23 AM
I did not ask you, why your soldiers did not catch people, which jumped from skyscrapers.

No you didn't.

So why are you asking it now? There is no point besides raising an emotionally charged issue to illicit an argument.


I did not speak that your firemen ran on ladders in skyscrapers and prevented people to leave from this building.

You didn't, and they didn't. The more you open your mouth, the more you reveal how little you know of the situation. Ran in on ladders?


It is meanly.

That is not a word.



I saw filming a hall of the NORTH OST after attacks and I saw that each gangster has received a bullet in a forehead.

Please provide a link and a clearer interpretation of what NORTH OST, and "gangster" are. You are not being clear in what you are trying to say.


The group ALPHA submits only to the president of Russia. They participated in all wars of stupid cold war. In 1992, they have not obeyed to order to kill people of Russia. They have risen between people and have stopped civil war. In Beclan has died 12 soldier. In Beclan the group had biggest losses for all history. You are usual domestic talker and you do not stand even a little finger of such people.

Please link to a site, in English, that shows us what you are talking about. You are making grandiose comparisons and elevating a mythical-type description of your own "elite" forces to godlike status.

That reeks of propaganda.

The more you speak, the more you reveal you really do not know.



It is meanly.

You could not have said it better yourself.


You really couldn't.

Ninjahedge
October 26th, 2006, 09:39 AM
They are all in one boat. Economics of US is indissoluble binded to US politics. I know just a little more then you thinking about me. :)

No they aren't. That is what seperates us from the former CCCP and is what made us able to survive the cold war.

The fact that they ARE seperate allows the government to get into debt over its head and still not have th ecountry collapse under the weight. The CCCP had all of its men in one boat, and when that onw boat started to leak, they all jumped ship and went their seperate ways.


Do not listen bobrik too serious, he is too young for making some conclusion about everyone Russian.

I don't think he represents you. I think he just may represent the misinformed in yuor country. He sounds very similar to the misinformed in my country. Teh same ones who defended our president and his mistakes so strongly.


We mostly doesn't matter about USA and Democracy ideology. But your "free" press awaking war song in the spirit of every Russian. When you writing some sensational, thinking about consequences, please, just a bit!

We do, but "our press" has many facets. And some of those facets feed off of causing trouble. The NYT is not really one of them. Although they may have some Op-Ed writers that are a bit more confrontory, they try to keep the news articles on pace.


Resonance of some articles can be destoyable, if ALL Russians will read that articles in Russian. We are very tolerant nation, but do not awake "sleeping bear". He just want to be in peace now and ever.

i do not fully understand what you are saying here. That the reprocussions from the articles rsponse can be damaging, or that the more inflamatory articles can be ignored?

I can understand where you are coming from in that, but asking the press to stay out is not something we are at liberty to do. The blessing and curse of "free" press is that you sometimes have to pay for it in other ways. One of which is a wing of sensationalism.

At the same time, you also have to realize that sometimes the truth hurts. You are allowed to react to it, but denial of it does not help anyone. Dealing with it (the truth) is sometimes he only way to solve the problem.


About jokes of Yetkee, he usually speaking with Germans. They have another culture. This is reason of his cruel humour. Truth to say we have very self-ironic humour too. Please forget about this and don't be offended, just understand it.

It gets lost in the translation. One who is not familiar with the language should refrain from derogatory humor. It NEVER sits well.


P.S. If you talking about Putin, you talking about representative of all Russians, we elect him twice and this is not random select. He have highest ratings and we will support him in any position while we trust him. Be careful when writing some like "bloody special agent Putin kill Politlovskaya". Have you any idea about justice and jurisprudence?

So because he was elected that means that he could not have done anything bad?

Our own president had a 92% approval rating at one time. Does that mean that you could not criticize him for his incorrect decisions?

It shouldn't, but it did. And as a result, we are involved in an extended conflict that is costing us thousands of lives and billions of dollars. Never be afraid to point out wat your leader, liked or not, is doing wrong.

Just because you like him does not mean he is perfect.


P.S.2. If start to tell truth, Westlands need a Weak Russia. All thats speeches about "We need Strong Russia" stand empty, when reading your press.

Then you are not reading it right. We need a strong Russia as an ally, not an enemy. We do not need them acting to circumvent any international efforts in a bid to assert themselves as a world power again.

We need them to take care of some of the sticky stuations around the world as well, and be willnig to send humanitarian aid to areas that need it. The US may currently be the worlds largest military power, but we should not be it's police and its piggy bank. (At the same time, we should not try to be its puppetmaster eitehr, but that is another topic... ;) ).

So whatever. We are all doing the same crap we always have been. Making mistakes and pointing fingers at everyone else. Both the US and Russia need to stop this and try to put pressure on countries like China to help change their position on things or we all will be having problems in the next 20-30 years....

lofter1
October 26th, 2006, 10:28 AM
Originally Posted by WebErr http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?p=127461#post127461)

Economics of US is indissoluble binded to US politics. I know just a little more then you thinking about me. :)
Ninjahedge:

No they aren't.
***

Hmmm ... come now, Ninja ...

You're not that naive, are you?

Ninjahedge
October 26th, 2006, 10:45 AM
I believe they have strong ties, but to say one is the same as the other is not necessarily the same thing.

Our government LOVES big buisness, but it is not in control of it by any means.

Big buisness controlls our government a lot more than the other way around, but in that instance we do have a bit of infighting.

So no, I am not that naive Loft, I just do not like general mass associations for complicated subjects... ;) (guilty)

ZippyTheChimp
October 26th, 2006, 10:47 AM
Of course economic systems of all nations are tied to government policies, but I don't think that is what was implied by WebErr.

It may be residual thinking from the days of the USSR. The Soviet government never accepted that American capitalism was more or less free wheeling. They rationalized its success against their failed Five Year Plans by assuming that , like NORAD, there was a US government economic control center buried somewhere, that secretly conducted its own Five Year Plans. Thus, capitalism was a sham.

incognito
October 26th, 2006, 11:17 AM
ZippyTheChimp: Now, that's interesting. Hever heard of that theory. Or was it so secret that only the leaders of the USSR knew about it? Would you mind telling us the source of where you learned of the theory, unless you were trying to humour us and ease the tension?

ZippyTheChimp
October 26th, 2006, 11:29 AM
^
When I lived in Brooklyn, the brother of my next door neighbor was assigned to the US embassy in Moscow.

Were you in the Soviet government - or, why would Kremlin policymakers share their theories of global politics with ordinary citizens?

incognito
October 26th, 2006, 11:45 AM
Sure they would not. I was just curious where that theory had come from. Unless brother of your neighbour was in the intelligence business that tends to know things, I don't see why the Soviet government would share their theories with him either. Then, it might easily had been a joke within certain circles, or just a tell story from your neighbour's brother. I can see though you must have taken it for real, haven't you?

Ninjahedge
October 26th, 2006, 11:52 AM
Sure they would not. I was just curious where that theory had come from. Unless brother of your neighbour was in the intelligence business that tends to know things, I don't see why the Soviet government would share their theories with him either. Then, it might easily had been a joke within certain circles, or just a tell story from your neighbour's brother. I can see though you must have taken it for real, haven't you?

Are you trying to start trouble, or is your wording accidentally instigating?

I can see where different ideologies might see the notion of seperation between buisness and government as a ruse, so the speculation is feasable.

Can you tell us, incognito, why you think this is bunk? You have not refuted the theory, just its possibility of having come from anywhere.

The village idiot could come up to me and say "don't smack a gorilla" and I would not have to ask him where he got that from in order to prove its validity. Not that Zip is by any means a gorilla! ;)

ZippyTheChimp
October 26th, 2006, 12:00 PM
Diplomats talk to each other.

I'm sure the model of a buried complex was a joke, but not the impression that the US could not be so successful without heavyhanded interference from the government.

Do you remember the silly movie "Red Dawn?"

In the US, it was just a movie. Hardly anyone took it seriously. But the Kremlin was upset that the US government allowed it to be shown, again overestimating the control Washington had over Hollywood.

That same overestimation is evident in this thread.

incognito
October 26th, 2006, 12:23 PM
I've had my share of people from diplomatic and intelligence business to learn that they don't really talk unless they're dead drunk, in which case they tell a mixture of the truth, semi-truth, and the lie, only to make a joke of it all the next morning. So, I am sure you guys give me a room for reasonable doubt.

If you're not pleased with my wording, I am sorry for that. Using your wording though, it's just a theory, and let's leave it at that then.

Yes, I'd seen the movie. Sometime in the end of eighties. Never took it for real though. Never had the desire to watch it again.

bobrik
October 26th, 2006, 03:51 PM
You mean lik ethat one time where terrorists had taken hostage in a church and your men attacked with tear gas and whatnot and ended up killing a good number of the hostages?

Umm hmm. There is a balance between fearing foreign aggressors and fearing the guys who are supposed to be protecting you.


You joyfully shouting that Russian poisoned hostages with gas but you do not know that is the NORTH OST. You are stupid racist.

Ninjahedge
October 26th, 2006, 04:39 PM
You mean lik ethat one time where terrorists had taken hostage in a church and your men attacked with tear gas and whatnot and ended up killing a good number of the hostages?

Umm hmm. There is a balance between fearing foreign aggressors and fearing the guys who are supposed to be protecting you.


You joyfully shouting that Russian poisoned hostages with gas but you do not know that is the NORTH OST. You are stupid racist.


No, I am not.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2365383.stm


Almost all the 117 hostages who were killed when Russian troops stormed a Moscow theatre on Saturday died from gas poisoning, it has been admitted.

Try "google" before you start spouting crap little man.

bobrik
October 26th, 2006, 05:36 PM
WebErr...
Do you see it now?

Ninjahedge

Yes I know, continue. Who has killed them?

WebErr
October 27th, 2006, 02:11 AM
Ninjahedge (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=2714)
You are pretty good student of your press.
But know one important thing. Everyone of your popular and readble journalists have a Master. Most power Master (union of several Masters) have a Putin-envy and Putin-hate. And your government (Rice) have a good deal with that Person(s). Russia have a rich by mineral resources and do not want to give it to your giant companies free (or with discount) and this is the way of "free" press to scream like a fishwife about "Not Democratic!", "Putin is Bloody Dictator!", "Gas is Russian Weapon!", "No Free Press!".
Oh, my... Just relax and open your eyes. We have good lider, make order in press and TV, make Westland pay for gas and oil (without any discount) and start living as any normal country. We happy! If you want, you can read comments of simple citizens about articles in your "free" press in inosmi.ru, but warning: it will be not so pleasure as read US press.
By the way, Rice was secret agent too, but she is specialist about Russia.
P.S. We are not so stupid to give free any resources (mineral or humanic), now we know true face of Democracic Ideology. We will never pay again for the words. Buy these words yourself.

bobrik (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=8589)
Don't worry about it. How can we explain? Forget it...

ZippyTheChimp (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=2463)
Where your Ex-Presidents go after their President Period? In giant corporation. Right?

WebErr
October 27th, 2006, 03:01 AM
I'll stand down but I'll keep an eye on things, Putin vows

From Tony Halpin in Moscow
http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif
LIKE a modern tsar, President Putin held court with ordinary Russians yesterday in a question and answer session that underlined his total dominance of the country’s political life. Mr Putin insisted that he would step down at the end of his second term in office in 2008 but made it clear that, like a tsar, he would retain influence for as long as possible.

NI_MPU('middle');
He offered no clue as to his preferred successor in the Kremlin.
Mr Putin, 54, is wildly popular with the public but is barred by the constitution from seeking a third term as president. One poll this month found that 77 per cent of Russians approved of his leadership.
Confident and at ease throughout the three-hour live television broadcast, he answered 55 questions from citizens in towns and cities across the country on subjects ranging from North Korea’s nuclear test to pensions, mortgage subsidies, support for young mothers and the poor performance of Russia’s football team. Organisers said that more than two million questions had been submitted for Mr Putin’s fifth annual phone-in programme. There was no explanation of how the selection was made.
Arkadi Kokayev, a driver from the Orenburg region, asked the question that is dominating debate in Russia: “We know that you are leaving in 2008. What will happen to us and to the country after 2008?” Mr Putin replied: “Arkadi, I think that everything will be OK, I am even confident about it.” He said that the constitution gave him no right to seek a third term “even though I like my work” and should not be tailored to suit his personal interests. Mr Putin went on: “Even having lost the powers and the levers of presidential power . . . I will manage to retain the most important thing that a person involved in politics must cherish — your trust. And using this, you and I will be able to exert influence on the life of our country and guarantee its development.”
Polls have shown repeatedly that a large proportion of Russians will vote for any presidential candidate backed by Mr Putin. Dmitri Medvedev, the First Deputy Prime Minister, is regarded as the favourite, but many analysts expect an unknown figure to emerge shortly before the elections, just as Mr Putin did.
Some predict that Mr Putin will seek to retain power, perhaps as prime minister, by promoting a weak candidate before running again for president after four years.
Mr Putin showed a formidable grasp of statistics as he answered questions from people gathered in small crowds with state TV correspondents from 11 cities. It was impossible to know whether the questions had been selected in advance, though they appeared spontaneous. Critics of previous broadcasts have accused the authorities of vetting those taking part. Mr Putin told one questioner that he was satisfied with Russia’s rapid economic growth since he gained power in 2000, but said the country had to stop relying on high energy prices.
Asked by a telephone caller whether recent assassinations — including those of the journalist Anna Politkovskaya and the central banker Andrei Kozlov — signalled a return to the instability of the 1990s, Mr Putin insisted that everything would be done to bring those responsible to justice.
“The obligation of the State is to bring any such investigation to the end — this concerns the killings of mass media representatives and killings in the economic sphere,” he said.
The President has said that he enjoys the opportunity to answer people’s questions directly, viewing it as a way to gauge public concerns. The response suggests that Russians are equally keen to speak to him. But some analysts dismiss the exercise as a stunt. Maria Lipman, of Moscow’s Carnegie Centre, said it exposed “that there are no democratic mechanisms in Russia, such as an opposition and an independent press, to hold the authorities to account”.


_____________________________________


P.S. Can this "free" journalist only write about it without any "democracy-opinion". What now with Putin? Let Britain or US lider stay afront their nation and try to speak with them. And we will listen.
If you want objective press, try to read someone objective.

WebErr
October 27th, 2006, 03:13 AM
This is all, what said our "Tzar", "Dictator" and "Bloody Agent", our dear Putin in online converse Yesterday
__________________________________________________ __________

YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Hello. This is the Direct Line with President of Russia Vladimir Putin – a special programme broadcast by Channel One and television channel Rossia.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich [Putin].
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Eighteen months have passed since the last Direct Line broadcast. And eighteen months have also passed since the beginning of your second term in office. How do you assess this time?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I’m not going to name a lot of figures now and list all that has been done and all that has not been done – and yes, there is enough that has not yet been done. I’ll go straight to what is most important, and that is that our economy continues to grow stronger and show positive growth. Over these last years the Russian economy has been growing at a rate of around 7 percent a year. This is a much higher growth rate than that of a large number of developed countries and countries in transition. We are not the absolute leader for economic growth but we are among the leaders. Last year our economy grew by 7.1 percent and this year we are expecting a figure of 5.9 percent. This is a good result and it is a condition for other positive developments in our country, above all, rising living standards for our people. Indeed, real income growth, minus inflation, stands at around 8.5 percent – 9-10 percent a year.
SERGEI BRILYOV: That is growth of people’s real incomes?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, growth of people’s real incomes. Growth of pensioners’ real incomes is lagging somewhat and is around 5.5 percent. Pensioners will see their real incomes rise by a bit more this year – 7.9 percent. We have a trade surplus and a primary budget surplus. The Central Bank’s gold and currency reserves are growing and have now reached $155 billion. Just as a reminder, in 2,000 they stood at only $12 billion. We are paying off our foreign debt - 16 percent of our country’s gross domestic product - here we have one of the best results in Europe. We have created the Stabilisation Fund, what some other countries call a fund for future generations. I imagine that we will come back to this fund, the question of whether we need it or not and what we should do with it. In any event, all of this together creates an absolutely stable situation in the country. People can plan their lives. They can better plan their business and family lives. And what is very important is that this all helps to put in place the conditions for being able to find broad solutions to pressing social problems and resolving the problems some sectors of our economy still face.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Thank you for that answer. You are here not to talk with us, however, but, through us, to talk with our viewers. Which city will we begin with?
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Yes, we have our TV cameras in 12 different places – in large cities and small towns. First on the line we have the Far East, Sakhalin Island.
It is 7 p.m. in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk at the moment. Our correspondent, Igor Kozhevin, is there right now. Igor, go ahead, we are waiting for questions for the President.
IGOR KOZHEVIN: Greetings to Moscow from the capital of the only Russian region entirely located on islands.
Good afternoon, Vladimir Vladimirovich,
Good afternoon, Yekaterina,
Good afternoon, Sergei.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
IGOR KOZHEVIN: Everything here in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk is ready for the Direct Line with the Kremlin and we just need to decide now who will put the first question. Who would like to go first? Please introduce yourself.
IRINA KISELYOVA: Irina Kisleyova. I’m an accountant.
Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
IRINA KISELYOVA: I have been living on Sakhalin for more than 20 years now. I work outside the city and to save time I have to drive my car to work. The sharp jump in petrol prices lately has me and all my friends in shock. Here on Sakhalin, 95-type petrol now costs 21 roubles, and this is here, in our oil-rich region!
So, my question is, what situation can we expect to see regarding petrol prices in the new year?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: This is an important issue at the moment not just for the Far East and for Sakhalin, but for the entire country. This sharp jump up in prices is only recent and peaked at the beginning of autumn. It is due to a number of circumstances, above all to the fact that the Russian economy has become a part of the international economy. This integration has many obvious advantages, but it also brings with it some problems in the fact that the general rise in prices for resources such as oil and gas and oil products, this general rise in prices around the world, is also having an impact on us. There also some issues specific to Russia, however, and the government will have to look into them and will do so in the nearest future.
Above all, you know, there are agreements with the leading companies and there are not many such companies – and there is also a problem here because these companies are essentially monopolising the market. There are eight main companies that have divided up the country’s regions between themselves and are able to establish their monopoly prices. But there are also issues that the government must resolve.
What are these issues? Above all, there is the taxation issue. I want to tell you that of the earnings received by the oil companies, and by the fuel and energy sector companies in general, only 20 percent remains in their hands. The rest goes to the state in the form of taxes and other payments. This whole situation is quite complicated for consumers, of course. Why? Because a number of these payments and taxes – the mineral resources tax, for example, and import duties – have a direct impact on domestic prices. The government is therefore currently looking at how to change this system in order to make these taxes and payments more balanced so as to ensure budget revenue but not have a system that creates pressure on the market and leads to rising domestic prices for petrol and other fuel, including diesel, which is very important for the armed forces and the agriculture sector. The government should have decisions ready in this area very soon.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, we await more questions.
IGOR KOZHEVIN: Yes, quite a few young people have come here today to put their questions to the President. I can see some hands raised. Please.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Go ahead.
QUESTION: Good evening, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Hello.
QUESTION: My name is Denis. I’m a second-year student at the Sakhalin State University. I’m actually from Yuzhno-Kurilsk but I’m studying here. I’m not the only one here – a lot of others from my home islands are also here and we have a common question.
We are all students but we will soon finish our studies and will begin our future lives, hopefully bringing benefit to the Kuril Islands. Our question is, how will our islands develop and will we be able to have decent lives, decent professional lives there? And how will the Japanese problem be resolved?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: What problem?
QUESTION: The issue of handing the islands, the Southern Kuril Islands, back to Japan.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: First of all, regarding the Far East’s development, we have a targeted federal programme for developing the Far East and there are no plans to end it.
As you know, at my instruction and the Prime Minister’s instruction, a group of government ministers recently visited the Far East and drew up the outlines for developing the region and set the priority areas for federal funding allocated to the region. All of these programmes will be carried out. This I can guarantee.
We understand all the problems the Far East faces. They include movement of people, high prices for air and rail travel and so on, and the decline in population. All of these issues are not easy to resolve in today’s conditions. But we will concentrate our efforts and our financial resources on tackling these problems.
I very much hope therefore that you and your friends and everyone who lives, studies and works in the Far East will have every opportunity to make use of your knowledge and your strength in your own region, in the place where you live, study and work.
Regarding the negotiation process with Japan over the four Kuril Islands, they are Russian sovereign territory and this is fixed in international law. This is one of the results of World War II. We have nothing to discuss on this particular point. Based on this position, we are ready to negotiate and we are negotiating. We would like to settle all points of dispute with our neighbours, including with Japan, a country with whom we have good-neighbourly relations. Our relations with Japan are growing stronger with every passing year. Both Russia and Japan have objective reasons for developing our economic, cultural and business ties and cooperating in a whole range of areas.
The issue you have raised is, of course, a very sensitive matter both for Japan and for Russia. I hope and am really convinced that if we show good will, and Russia does have this good will, we will always be able to find a solution that suits both parties, a solution that will benefit the people living on these islands and benefit the peoples of Russia and Japan. If we show that we are willing to accommodate each other we can find a solution.
SERGEI BRILYOV: It’s no coincidence that our viewer in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk wished us good evening, for it is 7 p.m. there. Let’s have one more question from the Far East before it gets dark there.
IGOR KOZHEVIN: Yes, we still have questions to ask.
MAXIM BOROVSKY: Maxim Borovsky. I’m the director of a dance club.
Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon, Maxim.
MAXIM BOROVSKY: My question concerns the cars we drive. Will cars with the steering wheel on the right be prohibited? This is a question that worries us a lot.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: There are no plans to introduce such a ban. But I think that you will agree with me that safety problems do exist in this area. You know about the terrible accident in the Altai that cost the life of the Governor of Altai Region. A car with the steering wheel on the right was involved in that accident. The driver didn't even have time to notice anything, saw practically nothing. Unfortunately there are many such examples. But, as I said, no bans in this respect are planned at the moment, at least, I know of no such plans.
Regarding the overall development of Russia’s automobile industry, the government has made a number of decisions recently that have met with various reactions from the public. But I want to assure you that all these decisions aim solely at creating the conditions for developing the automobile industry here in Russia. Many companies have already come here and are working here now. You know that BMW and some Asian carmakers are already manufacturing cars here. We are currently engaged in talks with Volkswagen and Mercedes. But if conditions in Russia are such that it will be more profitable for foreign carmakers to produce their cars at home and then export them to Russia, we will not see any development in the automobile industry here.
Of course, decisions of this kind should be balanced so as not to cause any serious loss for the consumer. But I want to draw your attention to the objective of these decisions and I hope overall that they are already having a certain positive effect.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Thank you to the people of Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Thank you.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Our correspondent in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk was Igor Kozhevin.
SERGEI BRILYOV: We will have more link-ups with different cities today, but now let’s go to the call centre in Moscow where Natalya Semenikhina is working. I just want to say that we were just informed that 3,500 text messages and 10,000 phone calls have come in the first ten minutes of the broadcast. But let’s go to Natalya Semenikhina for statistics, news and calls, of course.
NATALYA SEMENIKHINA: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich,
Hello Yekaterina and Sergei.
Our direct telephone line has been working for five days now and the number of calls is rising every second, so I will give you a round figure. So far, we have received almost 845,000 questions, and that is only counting questions put by phone. But as you said, questions are also being sent via SMS and we have around 40,000 of them so far. For the first time this year calls have also been coming in from Russians living in other countries.
Regarding Russia itself, the greatest number of callers at the moment is in the Central Federal District and also Siberia and the Volga region.
As for the types of questions raised, as could be expected, the biggest number of questions is about social issues, but there are also a lot of questions on the housing and utilities sector, the healthcare system, a lot of questions too on housing credits, the work of law enforcement agencies and the courts and problems in the armed forces. Of course, as usual, there are also plenty of questions on private matters. But I won’t spend too long on statistics and will give the floor to our callers. Now we have the city of Yeisk on the line.
Hello.
IGOR SALNIKOV: Hello.
NATALYA SEMENIKHINA: Please introduce yourself.
IGOR SALNIKOV: Salnikov, Igor Fyodorovich.
NATALYA SEMENIKHINA: Go ahead with your question.
IGOR SALNIKOV: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
IGOR SALNIKOV: The number of homeless children on the streets has been increasing all the time of late. People say that, according to the statistics, there are even more homeless children now than there were after the Civil War. Is there a way to solve this problem?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, the problem is a serious one and a very sensitive matter for us. It is linked to the difficult times the country traversed during the early and mid-1990s and to the undermining of the family as an institution. Many of these homeless children, after all, have parents who are alive, unlike during the time that you mentioned, the years following the Civil War. Back then there were a lot of homeless children who had lost their parents during the First World War or the Civil War, while now we have homeless children whose parents are alive. This is where the problem lies. But whatever the causes, the problem exists and the state should perhaps be paying more attention to it than it has done so far, although, you know, I am constantly bringing up this issue with the government.
We do have a programme for addressing this issue and the required funds and resources will be allocated, including for strengthening the institution of foster families, although in this respect I also have a lot of similar questions regarding building up the institution of adoption, and for developing children’s homes. We have plans in all these areas and we will, of course, take action.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Let’s have another question from the call centre.
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: I just want to say that we have received more than 10,000 questions already since the beginning of the broadcast. Now we have the town of Klin on the line.
Hello.
KONSTANTIN NIKITENKOV: Hello.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Introduce yourself please and ask your question. KONSTANTIN NIKITENKOV: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
My name is Konstantin Nikitenkov. I want to ask the following question: The Stabilisation Fund is growing all the time, including as a result of oil prices. So far nothing has been done with it but now you have announced that social reforms will take place. Where is the guarantee that the money won’t just be stolen?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: This question also worries me more than anything else. It is one of the key issues that we have to resolve in carrying out our social policy plans, the plans that I announced at the beginning of the month – it was on September 5, I think, that I announced these initiatives. Yes, I did indeed say that we could launch these reforms thanks to economic development, economic growth and an increase in revenue, but this has nothing to do with the Stabilisation Fund. The Stabilisation Fund is a separate issue and I will come back to it if we have the opportunity during today’s discussion. The Stabilisation Fund has not been created for resolving these social problems. Its purpose is to maintain our macroeconomic indicators and keep the economy in balance so as to prevent prices shooting up, keep inflation in check and ensure that we have all the necessary conditions in place to be able to resolve the social issues within the system we currently have and which we plan to develop. It is true that social spending in the budget is increasing and that the economic growth we are experiencing gives us more opportunities to tackle social problems. We are talking about serious, considerable increases in spending here. Huge resources will be allocated to agriculture and the healthcare system. Some areas will benefit from an increase in spending of 63 percent and some areas will see a many-fold increase in spending.
Of course this raises the question of how to control how this money is spent. I very much hope that the State Duma deputies, who will make the final decision on the 2006 budget and on the budgets for the next two years, and deputies in regional legislative assemblies, will control this process along with civil society and various public organisations. Why do I mention regional deputies? Because some of the programmes will involve co-financing from regional revenue sources. We need, of course, a system of public control that works smoothly and effectively and I very much hope that this will be the case.
SERGEI BRILYOV: We will come back to the call centre today. I just want to remind you that number to call to put your questions is: 8-800-200-40-40. As was said, we have received 3,500 text messages during the first 10 minutes of the broadcast. The number of mobile phones in the country is starting to outstrip the number of stationary phones. A lot of people are using mobile phones now. You can send your SMS messages to this number: 040-40. We will be coming back to Natalya Seminikhina at the telephone centre but now we have Siberia waiting. Let’s go to the city of Tomsk where our correspondent Alexander Minakov is working. Alexander, the floor is yours.
ALEXANDER MINAKOV: Hello. Tomsk sends its greetings to the President and to everyone in Russia.
One in five residents of Tomsk is a student, and that is why we have mostly students and teachers from Tomsk’s many higher educational establishments here in front of the Tomsk State University building today.
So, go ahead please with your questions.
ALEXANDER OSANIN: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
ALEXANDER OSANIN: My name is Alexander Osanin.
I graduated from the Physics and Technology Faculty of Tomsk State University three years ago and I just defended my Ph.D. thesis last week.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: My congratulations.
ALEXANDER OSANIN: Thank you. As was just said, Tomsk is a student town and many of the students stay on to pursue graduate studies and do research. But there is a problem with applying the results of research and trying out developments in practice.
I heard about the plan to create technology incubation zones. I very much hope that Tomsk will be the site of such a zone. This would do a lot to make life easier for young scientists, but this is not what my question is about.
My question is about the fact that young scientists have greater opportunities working abroad. Foreign companies come to Russian cities and invite young people, young scientists, to go and work for them.
Why is the situation in the country such that it is easier to go abroad rather than realise one’s potential here in Russia? Why is it so hard for young scientists to apply the results of their research and development in practice in the Russian economy, in the real sector of the economy?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: The first point I want to make is that your question shows both concern and preoccupation, but at the same time, despite the problems the ‘brain drain’ causes, we can see nonetheless that there is demand for graduates of our higher education system.
The second point is that our country guarantees its citizens freedom of movement and freedom of choice. This, I think, is not a bad thing in itself for individuals, and that goes for young graduates too. Of course, it would be better and more advantageous for our country to ensure that young people, young scientists, students and schoolchildren can realise their potential here in their own country. This is what we should be striving for, of course. We most certainly do need to create the conditions needed for people to make best use of their intellectual abilities and knowledge here in the Russian Federation. We should be competitive when it comes to providing these conditions.
The government is undertaking a whole number of steps in this area. One of these steps you already mentioned – the creation of technology incubation zones and other special zones that will offer the conditions for applying knowledge and developing advanced technology. We plan to create several such zones throughout the Russian Federation and will ensure the necessary financing and create the necessary administrative, legal and tax conditions. You spoke of this yourself and I can confirm that these plans are well underway and will be implemented as from January of next year.
But that is not all. One of the programmes that I outlined at the beginning of September is precisely about education. What is involved and what specific steps are being prepared?
First, we plan to select several innovative higher educational establishments that will receive additional financial assistance from the federal budget in order to buy laboratory equipment and attract top-level teaching staff or promising young teachers, and not only from among people here but also from among those who have left Russia to work abroad or from among people from other countries who would like to come here to work. Additional money will also be spent on introducing new educational programmes.
The plan is for these higher educational establishments to be chosen on a tender basis. The government is currently preparing the selection procedures. I propose that you also get involved and put forward your suggestions on this matter to the Education and Science Ministry.
There are also plans to make additional grants available to promising young scholars, young people who have proven their potential. These grants will be given not only to those who have already defended their Ph.D. thesis. We will make 5,000 grants of 60,000 roubles available to schoolchildren, students and young scholars.
Regarding young scholars in particular, you have probably already heard that their wages will be increased to at least 30,000 roubles a month by 2010, taking into account the changes that will be made to the Academy of Sciences system itself as regards pay scale.
We also plan to open two completely new universities that will make use of the academic science resources, one in the south of the country and the other in Siberia. And we will open two completely new modern management schools, one in the Moscow Region and one in St Petersburg.
All of this together, and also taking into account the assistance that will be provided for school-level education, which I am sure we will talk more about today, gives us reason to hope that young researchers who get their education here and want to make use of their skills and knowledge here will have the possibility of doing so.
SERGEI BRILYOV: I noticed how the eyes of the other students lit up when you mentioned that grants would be available not only for those who have already defended their candidate’s thesis. Obviously, they have ambitious plans for the future.
Let’s have another question from Tomsk.
ALEXANDER MINAKOV: Another question please. Let’s have a teacher put a question.
GALINA BARYSHEVA: Good afternoon, Mr President.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
GALINA BARYSHEVA: I’m Galina Barysheva and I’m a teacher at the Tomsk Polytechnic University.
Plans to reduce the number of military departments in higher educational establishments will soon be carried out. In this regard, people in higher education are worried that this reform will just be way of meeting the Armed Forces’ conscription target by making higher education graduates do military service. And also in this respect, what is the army doing to prepare for this mass influx of young people with higher education coming to do military service?
Also, does it not seem to you, Vladimir Vladimirovich, that the foundation of military reform and the guarantee of its success should be raising the value of soldiers’ lives, especially in peace time. What is being done to make this happen?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: You are absolutely right. This is the moral foundation of any army, and especially the Russian army. Let’s remember Suvorov and our other outstanding military commanders who always instructed their officers to look after their men. This is the moral foundation of our entire Armed Forces and this is the way it should be.
You mentioned the plans to reduce the number of military departments in higher educational institutions. I don’t remember the exact figure but I think there are currently 229 such departments. This is more than there were even during the Soviet years when the Armed Forces numbered five million people. Today our Armed Forces count 1.3 million people but the number of military departments has increased sharply. The Defence Ministry says that it simply does not need all these graduates turned out by these military departments. But the Defence Ministry had also drawn up a list of higher education institutions where military departments will continue to function. I do not know if they have already published this list or not, but if they haven’t, they will do so very soon. The number of military departments that will continue functioning will be quite sizeable and the institutions of higher education that will have these departments will be spread evenly across the whole country. Young people who would like to receive a military education in these military departments in parallel with a civilian education will have the option of entering these higher education institutions, which, as I said, will be spread evenly throughout the country.
What else is being planned? For a start, everyone who is already studying at institutions of higher education that currently has a military department will be able to finish their studies there without any problems and, as graduates of higher educational establishments with a military department, will not have to do military service. The question of military service will arise only for students who enter the higher education system as from next year, and they will know in advance which establishments have military departments and which do not. It will be up to each individual to make his choice.
Finally, starting in January 2008, military service will be reduced to just one year. I think you would agree that this changes the situation considerably. Of these 12 months, the new recruits will spend six months in training centres and then will have the option of either joining the regular troops for the following six months or of signing a contract and serving at least three years on a contract basis. Incidentally, we also need to put in place the conditions for young people serving in the Armed Forces on a contract basis to be able to receive a higher education under preferential conditions. Preparatory courses for entry to the higher education system should be organised for these young people. While studying in these courses, the young people will also receive their wages as contract servicemen for another year.
That is a general outline of what we plan to do in the area of military reform with regard to the education system.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Thank you Tomsk.
Which is the next city we will cross to?
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: We now go live to the Komi Republic and the city of Vorkuta where our correspondent Ilya Kulikov is working. Ilya, go ahead.
ILYA KULIKOV: Good afternoon and greetings from Vorkuta, the biggest city beyond the polar circle and the centre of the Russian north’s coal industry.
Our first question is precisely about the coal industry.
SERGEI BURKO: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich. My name is Burko, Sergei Nikolayevich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
SERGEI BURKO: Now to my question: yes, we are indeed concerned about the development of the coal industry. Everyone knows that a lot of attention is being focused on developing the oil and gas sector, but reserves of oil are not great – enough for 30-50 years – while coal reserves in Vorkuta, for example, are enough for another 500 years.
My question then is does the state intend changing its priorities in the energy sector? We are worried, of course, for the future of Vorkuta.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I understand.
As far as I know, the situation in Vorkuta is gradually improving and getting slowly closer to the situation in other coal basins, in particular the Kuzbass. There are still a lot of problems to resolve but positive trends are already visible.
Regarding reserves of coal, oil and gas, I think that our country’s oil and gas reserves are underestimated. In reality they are greater than we think and will last us some time yet. They will be enough for us and for future generations.
But we do, of course, need to use our resources wisely and you are absolutely right, it is essential that we gradually change the energy balance in the country. We need to ensure there is demand for other energy resources, and not just oil and gas, and that they be attractive for the economy and for consumers. And of course, an energy resource such as coal is very important in this respect.
We will continue supporting everyone working in this area, including by helping to finance the introduction of new technology. You specialists know better than I that technology exists for processing coal and turning it into an excellent energy product. This is modern but as yet still costly technology. We will try to plan our policy in such a way as to make it possible to introduce this new technology and create the conditions for developing business in this area.
I would like to wish you success. Thank you for your question.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Ilya, we have time for another question for the President.
QUESTION: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
QUESTION: I am a doctor and have been working in Vorkuta for more than 20 years now. At the moment we are seeing an increasing number of elderly people living in the far northern regions. There are cases of 90-year-old people ending up in our city hospital. My question therefore is, what is being done to carry out the programme to help pensioners leave the Far North and settle elsewhere in the country? The programmes we have here, the local programmes, are not working because there isn’t the money to help people resettle.
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: The money for these programmes comes from various sources, including from the federal budget. There is one problem in this area that the government has not yet managed to definitively resolve and that is the issue of maintaining the pensions at the same level for those who leave the Far North so that they won’t have an incentive to return, because some of the people who leave try to go back so as to benefit from the same pension they had previously. This is a question the government has to settle. We will come back to this issue and we will come back to it on more than one occasion. I understand you – this problem does exist. We will definitely come back to it.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Ilya, one more question for the President.
QUESTION: Marina. I’m a student.
Vladimir Vladimirovich, my question is the following: a branch of the Leningrad Mining Institute has been working in Vorkuta for 45 years now. But this year, the rector did not take in any new students because the Komi Republic could not or rather is not financing students’ tuition. This is an important matter for us because many of our students studied at this institute as it is the only institute that gives the people of Vorkuta the chance to study for free.
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: To be honest, I am not familiar with the details of this problem. I know the Mining Institute in St Petersburg is one of Russia’s best higher education institutions, and this is above all thanks to the rector’s work. I think the Mining Institute is a genuinely world-class establishment both for its equipment and, more importantly, for the quality of teaching it offers. As I see it, it is one of world’s leaders in education, a leader in Europe and in the whole world. It is a great pity, of course, that financial problems mean that not only can it not expand its activities, but that it is even cutting them back in Vorkuta. I do not know the exact reasons for this. I am ready to talk with the rector and with the governor. I promise you that I will put this question to them soon. I cannot guarantee that there will be a solution, because this depends on the rector and the governor, it is their area of responsibility. But we will raise this question with them. When I say ‘we’, I mean the government. And this matter will be discussed. I hope that you are happy with this proposal.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Thank you Vorkuta. Now let’s go over to the call centre.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Yes, I propose that we join Natalya Seminikhina again, all the more so as the call centre lets us cover a greater area. Natalya, are SMS messages still coming in? And are they coming in with smiles? What can you tell us about the content of the calls coming in?
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: More than half the calls coming in now are from mobile phones. People can not only call for free from their mobile phones but also write and we have been getting SMS messages for several hours now. There are already 44,000 SMS messages. As is typical of this format, they are laconic in style and unfortunately, are not always signed.
Here is a question from a foreign student who is worried about the problem of neo-Nazi groups. To quote his question, “We are often attacked. How can we preserve trust, respect and friendship in such a situation?”
VLADIMIR PUTIN: This question also worries me, of course. And it would be no exaggeration to say that it worries not just me but all of Russian society. Russia is a part of the modern world and, unfortunately, these kinds of manifestations are on the increase in practically every country. This is an illness we all face. There is only one medicine for this illness and that is for the public to reject such manifestations. We will step up the law enforcement agencies’ work in this area and will do all we can to make sure that skinheads and fascist-minded groups are no longer a part of this country’s political landscape. We will make every effort in this area. As for the attacks that take place or have taken place, I am aware of them and I can but apologise to you for them.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Let’s have one more question.
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: One more question, Vladimir Vladimirovich, this time from 19-year-old Ali from Dagestan. He sent an SMS asking why there is so much unemployment in Dagestan and yet there are also so many lavish houses.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, that is a very interesting question. Unemployment really is a big problem not just in Dagestan but in other republics in the south of Russia as well. Dagestan is particularly hard hit, however. The highest unemployment is in Chechnya, followed by Dagestan and Ingushetia. This is a huge problem. There are hundreds of people competing for every one job, and these are mostly young people. This is why the absolute priority for the southern regions is to develop their own economic base and develop production.
I discussed this problem with the leaders of the southern regions just a few days ago. There are some concrete plans but, as you understand, they can’t be implemented overnight, especially in a situation of destabilisation and security concerns. The security problem needs to be resolved. But we will go ahead with these plans nonetheless and will take a complex approach to resolving all these problems.
Regarding the lavish houses, this is a sign of another problem. It is a sign that the money allocated by the federal authorities is entering the region through other channels, is not always being spent effectively and not always being used exclusively for the interests of the entire public and the whole region. This, of course, is a matter for the law enforcement agencies to examine.
But, of course, we can assume that there are also people, including in the southern regions, in Dagestan, who have earned their money legally and have the right to build or buy comfortable housing. It is important only that this be done legally.
SERGEI BRILYOV: I propose that we leave the call centre now because we have the opportunity to pick up on this subject, as it were, as we now have a very interesting location ready to go live.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Let’s cross now to the Republic of Chechnya and its capital, Grozny.
Our correspondent Maxim Kiselyov is working in Grozny. Maxim, go ahead, we are waiting for questions for the President.
MAXIM KISELYOV: Hello. Greetings from Grozny. So as not to lose any time, let’s go straight to the questions. I think there are plenty of questions.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
MAXIM KISELYOV: Please introduce yourself and ask your question.
ZAINAB DZHAMBEKOVA: Hello, Mr President.
I am Zainab Dzhambekova. My question is, when will the abduction of people end in Chechnya? My son was abducted four years ago and nothing is known about his fate since then. There are thousands of women in Chechnya in the same situation as me.
And one more question, will anyone bear the responsibility for this?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Your question is a very serious one and it has been coming up all the time at every level over the last years.
We all realise where the problem lies – it lies with not being able to fully resolve the security issue and ensure security for all. I think you will agree with me that sometimes it is impossible to even identify just who is behind these crimes: is it bandits in disguise or is it law enforcement officers abusing their powers? Whatever the case, we will continue our efforts to find the people who have been abducted and to identify those responsible for these crimes.
You know, dozens of criminal cases have been opened against officials and servicemen from the federal forces, with the involvement of the local law enforcement agencies. But the main solution to the problem is to achieve political settlement in Chechnya and to involve the greatest number of people possible in this settlement process.
You know that law enforcement agencies have been set up in Chechnya itself, agencies that are staffed entirely by local people, by the Chechens themselves. This is one point.
And a second point, I place a great importance on the parliamentary election that will take place in Chechnya this November. I think that this election will bring to the fore people with all sorts of different political convictions so that all the disputed issues can be resolved in an open and civilised manner, through the political process and not through the use of force. In this respect, I very much hope for support, not only your support but that of everyone in Chechnya.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Let’s have another question from Grozny.
AMRAN DZHAMAYEV: My name is Dzhamayev, Amran Germanovich, and I am a People’s Artist.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
AMRAN DZHAMAYEV: Good afternoon.
Mr President, when you visited our republic, you compared the state of Grozny to the destruction at Stalingrad. Several years have gone by since then but the rebuilding of the city is taking place extremely slowly and it is very difficult to obtain compensation. I lost my apartment in 2,000 and since then I have been gathering documents, waiting my turn in corridors and facing humiliation. For several years now my family and I have been living in other people’s apartments. In speaking of my situation I am also speaking for thousands of other people facing the same suffering. When we will be able to receive compensation? When will the payments begin?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: First, you say that compensation exists, and the money for it does exist and is provided for in the federal budget. How the compensation is actually paid depends on the authorities in the republic itself.
I must say, and this is an unusual phenomenon, but the original figure that the republic’s authorities stated as being eligible for compensation payments is rising all the time. Unfortunately, the federal authorities and the authorities in Chechnya itself have still not been able to put an exact figure on how many concrete people are entitled to these compensation payments. What I can say and what I can promise is that all of this money will be paid. I will speak again with the President of Chechnya and with the relevant organisations in Moscow and will give additional instructions for the money to be made available and for order to be brought to the payment procedures.
Regarding the rebuilding of Grozny in general, this is, of course, a problem that requires a complex solution. We need to ensure security, on the one hand, so that what is built is not then destroyed tomorrow, and we need to organise this work in the republic itself. As you know, unfortunately, it took a very long time to settle the question of transferring the construction management offices from Moscow to the Republic of Chechnya. Finally, with a bit of extra encouragement, shall we say, this issue was finally settled and the authorities in Chechnya are now organising the work locally. I hope that this will help improve the situation. The necessary funding will be made available for this purpose.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Maxim, let’s have another question from Grozny.
MAXIM KISELYOV: Let’s take one from this side, from someone younger. The young people also have their questions, I’m sure.
AISHAT VASHAYEVA: Good afternoon, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
AISHAT VASHAYEVA: My name is Aishat Vashayeva and I am a fourth-year student at the Chechnya State University.
As you know, our republic has the highest unemployment rate in Russia and a great many people of working age are without jobs here. Many young people graduate from our higher educational establishments every year but find no demand for their skills. To give you a small example, of 170 students who graduated with distinction from the Chechnya State University, only seven found jobs in Chechnya itself. As for finding work in other parts of Russia, this is virtually impossible for Chechens because of the negative image people have of us.
Vladimir Vladimirovich, what are the federal authorities doing to bring down the unemployment rate in the republic and to change the negative attitude towards Chechens as a people.
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I already said that Chechnya, unfortunately, has the highest unemployment rate in Russia. I think there is no need to explain that this situation is due to the difficult events of the last 15 years. It is true that there are more than 500 people competing for every one job. This is an absolutely unacceptable situation but the only way to change it is to expand Chechnya’s own economic opportunities and create new businesses. This process is underway, it must be said. I am afraid of making a mistake in the figures, but the number of people with jobs in Chechnya is rising all the time. We need to provide help, of course, to the agriculture sector, to the oil and gas industry and also help the development of Chechnya’s traditional businesses such as brick and stone plants and also develop high-technology businesses, because young people such as yourself who have received a good education need to have the opportunity of making use of your knowledge in your home region, and you should be able to do so.
As for the image the Chechens have in the country in general, this is also linked to the difficult events that I have mentioned, but I think this is a distorted image, distorted by the influence of events from the last years. Why is it distorted? Because few people know about the heroes in Chechnya who gave their lives to defend the interests of their own people and of all the people of Russia, the interests of Russia itself. There are many examples of such heroes but, unfortunately, little is said about them. I hope that we will be able to learn more about the lives and the feats of these people and gain a knowledge of greater depth and breadth. I hope that this will change the image of the Chechens in the Russian Federation. Of course, this will require the state media to also make an effort.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Thank you, Maxim. Thank you to all the people of Grozny who took part today in the Direct Line with the President.
Questions are coming in now and have been coming in for several days now on the Direct Line website: www.president-line.ru. The operators are trying to count them right now but so far thousands of questions have been registered. We will give the exact figure during this broadcast. Right now on your screens you can see the rating of the most popular questions that have come in via the Internet.
And Sergei…
SERGEI BRILYOV: I have a question here that is doubly topical. I don’t like the fact that it hasn’t been signed, but this is not the most important thing. Just a few days ago marked one year since your memorable speech on September 13, 2004, when you proposed a new system for electing regional governors under a procedure that would see regional legislative assemblies vote on a candidate nominated by yourself. The person who sent this question recalls, in this respect, that twice during previous Direct Line broadcasts, the question of the difficult situation in the town of Ust-Kut was raised. This year, you nominated Alexander Tishanin to replace Boris Govorin as governor of Irkutsk Region [where Ust-Kut is located]. This was just recently. Was this the result of the Direct Line broadcasts?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: No. It was, of course, above all a result of looking at the situation in the region and taking into account the fact that Boris Govorin had already spent two terms in office as governor. That is a perfectly respectable term in office for a region such as Irkutsk Region. He has a lot of experience in both state affairs and economic management and I hope that we will find the opportunity to make use of his knowledge in another area. But I wanted to see in the region someone who on the one hand would know the local situation and at the same time would also be able to bring fresh ideas for the solutions that people in the region are waiting for. The candidate I proposed has administration experience in the region for having worked around two years there as head of the regional subdivision of Russian Railways and he knows the local economy and the local problems, and at the same time – let’s put it in this way - he is someone not connected by any circumstances to the local bureaucracy, which should be resolving some problems a lot more effectively than it has done so until now.
SERGEI BRILYOV: We will come back to the Internet, but now let’s find out which city we have ready to go live.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Now we have one of the main centres of our defence industry – Izhevsk, the capital of Udmurtia.
Izhevsk is now live and I give the floor to our correspondent, Maxim Bobrov.
MAXIM BOBROV: Good afternoon, Yekaterina, good afternoon Sergei.
Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich.
Greetings from Udmurtia, from Izhevsk, a city of many famous names such as that of the firearms designer Mikhail Kalashnikov or the skier Galina Kulakova. The people of Izhevsk have come here, to Pushkin Street in the centre of the city, to take part in our discussion today.
Please go ahead with your questions, but introduce yourselves first.
ANDREI NIKOLAYEV: Hello. My name is Nikolayev, Andrei Alexandrovich.
Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Hello, Andrei Alexandrovich.
ANDREI NIKOLAYEV: My question is, why is our defence industry surviving through orders from the West while our own armed forces can’t buy our newest weapons? I, for example, am a lathe operator at the Kupol Plant and we build high-precision anti-aircraft missile systems that are in demand all around the world. At the moment, we have practically no orders. When will our own state start paying attention to the defence industry’s problems?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Andrei Alexandrovich, a few years ago, our army was buying practically nothing at all. I will say a few words now about what is happening in the army. I am asked a lot of such questions by military people.
First of all, I would like to say that a great deal has been done over the last years to improve the situation in the defence industry production enterprises. This concerns paying debts, placing orders, preserving jobs and developing high-technology production.
Exporting our products and making use of the opportunities export markets offer is, of course, a good advantage and gives us the chance to ensure financial and technical support for our defence industry. Competition for these export markets is very fierce. That our specialists are able to establish their place in these markets and promote our interests there is a very good result.
Sales came to around $5 billion last year. Last year we also broke for the first time what I would call a psychological barrier in that we spent more than this sum on defence procurement for our own Armed Forces. In other words, we are spending more on modernising and re-equipping our Armed Forces than we earn from selling arms abroad.
Of course, our arms have a justifiably good reputation in the world. This goes for our air defence systems, our armoured personnel vehicles, firearms and much more. This also goes for our navy, for our battle ships and naval weapons systems.
There is still a lot to be done in terms of re-equipping our army. This concerns modern tanks, for example – for the first time we will be purchasing a large delivery of new tanks for the army. We are now beginning to test new, modernised, missiles that can be used both on land and at sea. We are beginning to place orders for new ballistic missiles, including mobile systems. We are continuing work on developing high-precision weapons and they are being tested – as you probably saw, I took part in this testing recently. These are long-range high-precision missiles and, as I have said earlier, no one else in the world has such arms yet and are unlikely to have them before us. They are supersonic systems that can change trajectory and altitude and are practically invulnerable, including for the anti-missile defence systems being developed by certain of our partner countries.
Of course, it would be good to do yet more, but we have to keep in step with the possibilities our economy offers and also take into account the need to resolve social problems.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Let’s take another question from Izhevsk.
MAXIM BOBROV: Yes, you were one of the first to come here and have been asking for the floor for a while now. Please.
VERA OVCHINNIKOVA: Good afternoon. My name is Ovchinnikova, Vera Alexandrovna, and I am an accountant.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
VERA OVCHINNIKOVA: Vladimir Vladimirovich, my question is about housing. For most people, a home of their own remains a luxury. If you don’t qualify for the “Young Family” programme, the only thing you can do is take out a commercial loan, but the interest rates are very high. What can we do? My question is, why have mortgages not became a mass phenomenon? Why are they still unaffordable for people with middle or low incomes?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: They haven’t yet become a mass phenomenon for several reasons.
The first, and primary, reason is that people have low incomes.
The second reason is the state of the economy and the high inflation. Banks cannot offer low interest rates when inflation is high.
The third reason is the lack of an adequate legal framework for developing this kind of activity.
These and several other issues all have to be resolved. Given that opportunities are expanding and the state has greater economic possibilities now, affordable housing will definitely be one of the priorities for development. You rightly drew attention to the mortgage system. It is the most promising system. This does not mean that the state will forget about social housing – we will continue to build social housing. Incidentally, state funding for housing for World War II invalids will increase many-fold as from next year. I want to stress the size of this increase. I think we had allocated only 200 million roubles to this item this year, but next year budget financing for this will be increased to 3 billion roubles. I would like to draw the veterans’ organisations’ attention to this decision.
Coming back to mortgages, there are several issues to be resolved in this area. First, we will add to the Mortgage Loan Agency’s charter capital and will start by allocating around 15 million roubles – 14.8 million, I think – for state guarantees for these loans. The government expects that this should make it possible to extend the term of loans from 7-8 years as it is at the moment to 20-25 or even 30 years.
Second, this should help to make mortgage loans cheaper. This year only around 40,000 mortgage loans have been made, but we expect that by 2008-2010, more likely 2010, the number of mortgage loans made each year will be at least 1 million.
As part of the programme for rural areas and for young families, we plan to subsidise the interest costs of mortgage loans and make state funds available so that people can add their own money to the funds received and either buy an apartment straight away or use these state funds as a subsidy in order to make the initial payment on a mortgage loan. We plan to do this on a differing scale for the different regions. In some regions people will be able to receive up to fifty percent in the form of a state subsidy and the other fifty percent will either come from their own funds or from a loan. In some places, above all in rural areas and depressed regions, there will be 100-percent subsidies that will give people the possibility of being tenant in the property with the right to later buy it. This will concern depressed regions and the rural areas, young families and specialists in rural areas. That is a general outline of the programme.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Thank you, Izhevsk.
Our Direct Line continues. Just a few seconds ago, the operators told me that 38,000 questions have now been registered via the Internet. Now we go over to the call centre.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Yes, we will come back to the Internet a little later. Now let’s go over to Natalya Seminikhina. So, Natalya, are the SMS messages coming in with smiles or without?
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: It’s a mixture. Our centre is working at peak capacity just now – 250 people are trying to call every second and 65,000 questions have already been processed since the beginning of the broadcast. In total, we so far have 910,000 questions for the President. Let’s try to take a caller right now with one of these questions.
Hello.
IGOR GUSKOV: Hello.
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: Introduce yourself please and ask your question.
IGOR GUSKOV: Guskov, Igor, 36 years old, from Ulyanovsk.
Vladimir Vladimirovich, my question is about a third presidential term. I know you have been asked this question many times in the past and I know what answers you have given. The reason I am asking this question is that in our recent history you are the only leader that has enabled the country to live through a period of stable development. After 2008, I would like to feel just as secure about the future, to live in a stable and wonderful country and have a strong and intelligent President. I am not saying this to flatter you – this is just the reality of the situation. Maybe it would be worth holding a referendum on a third presidential term? I’d like to know your view on this question.
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I don’t see my job as being to sit forever in the Kremlin and having channel one, channel two and channel three all showing one and the same face on the TV screens the whole time and for the head of the FSB to then say “put it on the first three channels”. I see my job as being to create the conditions for our country’s long-term development and for young, competent and effective managers to be able to take over the leadership. I do not think it would be expedient therefore, to make any sudden changes to our laws, above all to the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
As for me personally, as military people say, I will always know how to find my place in the ranks.
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: Just briefly on the statistics for SMS messages, we have received more the 14,000 messages since the broadcast began, some of them with smiles, no doubt.
Coming back to ordinary telephones, we have a caller now from Rostov Region.
Hello.
SVETLANA DOLYA: Hello.
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: Introduce yourself, please.
SVETLANA DOLYA: I am Svetlana Dolya.
NATALYA SEMINIKHINA: Go ahead.
SVETLANA DOLYA: Vladimir Vladimirovich, why can we not make it normal for families in Russia to have two or three children?
The people who set the amount for child benefits know that this isn’t even enough to buy disposable nappies. In Finland, for example, child benefits are 200 euros a month for one child.
How do you intend to combat the population decline in our country?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: The demographic situation in our country began to show negative tendencies starting at the end of the 1960s and this has continued over all the subsequent decades. In this respect, Russia is little different to other European countries. Despite the fact that many countries in Europe and North America spend a lot of money on supporting population growth they have not had any noticeable success yet. This is a very complex problem and there are a lot of different factors involved. It is, of course, a problem that we do need to resolve. Just because it is a complex issue does not mean that the state should not be giving it attention and increasing support in the areas that you mentioned.
Of course I think that we should resolve the problems connected to the payments you spoke about. But not only that. That is not enough. First of all, it is evident that we must think of maintaining the country's social and economic stability. This is the basic condition. I have already spoken about how people must have a longer-term view when planning their private and family lives. It is necessary to raise the population's incomes.
As for the immediate question, the State Duma is currently examining some initiatives, one of which consists in increasing the lump sum received at a child's birth from 6,000 to 8,000 rubles. Another initiative consists of increasing payments for children's upbringing from 500 to 700 rubles a month until they are one and a half years old. Certainly, I will support these initiatives. But that too is not enough. I think that we should help women who want to have children. First of all, we must create conditions whereby giving birth is free, actually free. There are various ways to resolve this issue, including issuing vouchers so that women could give their voucher to any clinic so that money would follow the quality of medical services provided in this field. Other options are also being studied and it is certain that we will introduce them.
S. BIRLEV: Natalia, are there any other callers on the line or shall we move on to other points? Let's leave it at that...
N. SEMENIKHINA: Yes, we have a caller from Severodvinsk on the line.
Hello.
A. KUTEPOV: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
V. PUTIN: Good afternoon.
A. KUTEPOV: Alexander Petrovich Kutepov, from the city of Severodvinsk in the Arkhangelsk Region. I have the following question. The mandatory car liability insurance is expensive and clearly does not work. As a result this is not a service, but a tax.
Thank you.
V. PUTIN: I agree with you that the quality of the current legislation and laws is not the best, and that they can be improved.
At the same time you know what a disgrace the situation on our roads is, how many people perish, and how many car accidents occur. I must say that the amount of money paid is a significant one. I do not remember exactly how much the insurance companies keep, but I do not think that it is more than 20 percent of the money they receive. They must pay all that is left as insurance payouts.
I repeat once again that this issue is constantly under consideration by the Government and State Duma. I believe it is possible that based on practice and experience we already have, we can make decisions to perfect this law's functioning. Certainly, this must start from reality, from the population's real incomes and specified groups of the population. Of course, this is absolutely correct.
S. BRILEV: Well, thank you to the telephone centre, thank you to Natalia Semenikhina. We will come back to you again. Now, we have live televised communication with a very unusual place—Riga, Latvia.
Oleg Groznetski joins us together with visitors of his improvised studio. Oleg, you have the floor.
O. GROZNETSKI: Hello Moscow. First I would like to explain why we are broadcasting not from the streets of Riga, but from here, on the territory of the «Moscow House». Riga's municipal authorities agreed that we could install our mobile television station in Old Riga, on Livonian Square, but then revoked their decision. They abruptly cancelled, referring to the fact that the local authorities cannot provide safety during air time. And as a result, we are here on the territory of the Russian cultural and business centre «Moscow House». Latvia's inhabitants have gathered here, and have many questions for the Russian President.
Please introduce yourself. Your question.
S. SAVITSKAYA: Svetlana Savitskaya.
Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich.
V. PUTIN: Good afternoon.
S. SAVITSKAYA: My question concerns Russian schools. You probably know that the Russian language is systematically being excluded from Latvian schools. At the same time, our schools, Russian schools, do not have the necessary teachers or materials in Russian. We know that Russia now has the means of helping us with this issue. We would like to know whether we have a chance of receiving this help.
Thank you very much.
V. PUTIN: First, I want to say that I regret you had to gather on roofs. It certainly is strange, unusual, and a shame that Riga's municipal authorities, under the pretext of inability to provide security, refused you permission to broadcast live from one of Riga's streets or squares. It would seem to me that such events should bring together all inhabitants of Latvia, regardless of their ethnic or linguistic background. I think that all of our actions, including today's, despite the fact that you are on the roof, should promote the solving of this issue, of this problem. But we shall not be offended by these people. We all come from one large common house which used to be called the Soviet Union. Apparently, what we used to call 'birthmarks from the Soviet past' still exist on the face of some authorities of some countries in the former Soviet Union; it is the desire to take hold and not let go, and to forbid everything. This is counterproductive. On the contrary, it is better to work with people, to prove one's point, to listen to others. This is what I shall now try to do, based on the question you just asked.
The problem with Russian schools and Russian language exists also outside of Latvia and the Baltic states. You know, I do not wish to demonize the position of Latvian authorities. At the UN summit in New York I just had the opportunity of talking with the President Vike-Freiberga. We had a very good conversation and the President understands many problems, including those of the Russian-speaking population. I very much expect that both on the national and regional levels in Latvia, a correspondingly positive reaction will result in normal conditions for people's development, independently of their ethnic or linguistic background, for all those who have chosen Latvia as their homeland.
Regarding our support for the Russian language in the former republics of the Soviet Union, we try to do this through many different channels, both through governmental ones and through social organizations. Of course the main burden on the Education Ministry and Foreign Ministry is to provide means for purchasing educational literature. We will continue to do this and what we have already done, namely inviting teachers from Russian schools and those that teach Russian to seminars in the Russian Federation, in Moscow and in other cities. We will try to have our researchers, researchers who could do something useful for the organization of teaching in Russian in Latvia, go to Latvia and to other countries. Meanwhile we very much expect that Latvian citizens and authorities will understand that Russia is not preparing to cause divisions within Latvian or any other Baltic society. On the contrary, we want them to have strong society in which people feel like full-fledged citizens of the country in which they live and which they have chosen as their homeland, regardless of their ethnic or linguistic origins.
Certainly Russia will be close by and ready to provide all possible help in resolving the issues which arise before you and which affect your life. But I repeat that we will not do so in a confrontational way and create new problems, but rather create conditions for your successful life in these countries and so that you feel like full-fledged citizens in the country you call your homeland.
S. BRILEV: Riga, we are staying with you.
Oleg, please, one more question.
O. GROZNETSKI: You wanted to ask another question. Please come closer.
O. KALMYKOV: Good afternoon.
V. PUTIN: Good afternoon.
O. KALMYKOV: Vladimir Vladimirovich, I am Oleg Viktorovich Kalmykov, a Russian citizen.
Can you please tell me why the Pension Fund examines our requests concerning the determining of our pensions for over a year?
Thank you.
V. PUTIN: You know that the corresponding decision and intergovernmental agreements have been made between countries of the CIS so that pensioners living in one of the CIS countries but who are actually citizens of another country will be provided for as if they were citizens of the country in which they live.
I cannot precisely tell you right now whether this setup is advancing in the Baltic states or not, but if you consider that the questions which need to be solved according to current legislation, are affected by too many bureaucratic delays, I promise you that I will pay attention to the relevant instances of this problem. Starting today.
S. BRILEV: While we are still connected with Riga, on the roof, let us continue our dialogue. Please Oleg, one more question.
O. GROZNETSKI: We just had a Russian citizen on air. And here we have a special category that is uncommon for Russia at large, the category of non-citizen—a non-citizen of Latvia. Are there any non-citizens among us? Please, what is your question?
E. GONCHAROV: Good afternoon! Edward Goncharov.
Vladimir Vladimirovich, you repeatedly mentioned that here we are not even foreigners, we are non-citizens. Nevertheless, we are your compatriots. What concrete help can you give us?
V. PUTIN: When answering the first question, I already spoke about this. This situation is definitely not a normal one. An impartial observer, analyst or politician including those in Latvia, or any person who believes that they respect human rights must agree with this. In the world, there exist definite legal and conceptual means to connect a person with the state and territory in which he permanently resides. All of these can be listed on one's fingers. This is either a citizen, a foreigner, an apatride, person without citizenship, or a person with dual citizenship. Non-citizen or as sometimes is written in the documents such a shameful word as «alien» is an invention of our colleagues from some of the Baltic states and absolutely does not exist either in the universal legal system, nor in the systems of rights in the European Union. But we very much expect that sensible people in the Baltic states will understand this and having realized the damage done to the legal system will do all they can to change these conditions. On our part, through diplomatic channels, channels of direct communication between our states, and in dialogue with the European Union we will arrive at a solution to this problem. Once again I would like to emphasise that it is necessary for those who make decisions at a national level to realize the necessity of accepting these decisions for themselves, for their own country. We will achieve this.
S. BRILEV: Well, thank you Riga, Latvia and we will come back to Russia. Katya, what is next for us?
E. ANDREEVA: Now we have the village Golovchino of the Graivoronovskogo area, in the Belgorod Region online. The village is on the border between Russia and Ukraine and our correspondent Ilya Kanavin works there.
Ilya, we greet you and the inhabitants of Golovchino.
I. KANAVIN: Hello! We welcome Russia and we welcome you too.
Good afternoon, Vladimir Vladimirovich!
Good afternoon, Ekaterina! Good afternoon, Sergei!
Indeed, the village is practically on the border. Moreover, at the entrance of one of the communities, there is a huge sign on which is written «Here Russia Begins». This is a rather typical thing.
What is not typical? In general, the village Golovchino is not typical for Russia. Not typical in that it is well built, comfortable to live in, and has an uncharacteristically high number of young people. Indeed, there are a great many youth here. 7,000 people live in this enormous village. You know, it is necessary to admit that the feeling of certain wealth was a great discovery for us and a very pleasant one. Nevertheless, of course people have problems, of course they have questions for the head of state. Who is ready? Please, do not forget to introduce yourselves.
L. MURAKHOVSKAYA: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich. I am Ludmila Aleksandrovna Murakhovskaya. My husband and I live close to the Ukrainian border. Our daughter lives in Kharkov. To visit each other by train is very inconvenient because it only runs once a day, and after the «Orange Confusion» it is a very long way by car—instead of 60 kilometres you have to go more than 120 kilometres as it is necessary to cross at a central border point and pay to enter Russia. Car insurance is also very expensive. The conditions for crossing the border are becoming tougher. For this reason we cannot even bring our children a bag of potatoes. And it was very recently that almost every weekend, upon hearing the car horn, we greeted our grandchildren with joy. In turn, they jumped for joy to see their grandfather and grandmother. We fear that we will soon lose this pleasure. It would be even worse if some misfortune occurred, or maybe a relative's funeral. How would we reach them?
I have a very painful question to raise: can we expect that the crossing of the Russian-Ukrainian border will be simplified, if only for the inhabitants of the border region?
V. PUTIN: I understand your pain and concern and share it completely. I share it completely! It is absolutely inadmissible when two ethnically, culturally and historically close peoples, literally the very closest relatives in blood and in spirit find themselves divided. And this split is increased through the confusion you just mentioned.
At the same time I want to assure you that Russian leadership and—this is very important—Ukranian leadership—this I want to emphasize, in the course of many personal encounters with the President of Ukraine, Viktor Andreevich Yushchenko, we agreed that we shall work together to simplify the procedure for crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border. Moreover, the President of the Ukraine's position is consistent and firm. I am even ashamed to tell you this, but he himself put these questions to me, questions which both sides have not properly solved at the bureaucratic level.
This also concerns car insurance. I promise you that it is absolutely imperative that we return to this issue, and certainly we will aspire to simplify the movement of our citizens and in general those between Russia and Ukraine and our other former republics of the Soviet Union as much as possible. We will do this wherever it is possible and wherever we meet a reciprocal response. Of course, first and foremost this must affect those living in the border areas. As you know, we made the decision that Ukrainian citizens in or entering the territory of the Russian Federation can be here without registration for up to 30 days. This decision was made in reply to corresponding steps taken on the Ukrainian side. We shall search for further joint answers to these problems. This I can faithfully promise you.
Certainly, how effective we will be depends on both parties. But from the Russian side we are full of determination to solve these problems.
E. ANDREEVA: The village of Golovchino remains on the air. Ilya, another question.
I. KANAVIN: Yes, certainly. Please, don't be nervous, easy.
L. TOLMACHEVA: No, we are not nervous.
Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich.
V. PUTIN: Good afternoon!
L. TOLMACHEVA: I am Ludmila Viktorovna Tolmacheva, a teacher.
Despite the fact that housing has already been a topic today, for us rural youth, it is a pressing problem.
My husband and I recently finished building our own house. Regional programmes helped us very much; we received land free of charge, and an interest rate reduced to one percent annually. As with each family in Belgorod that gives birth to a third child, we received 100,000 rubles from the authorities to complete construction of the house. However, despite all the help from the authorities, building one's own house is very expensive and takes a long time.
Vladimir Vladimirovich, please tell whether we, rural youth, can expect from the government to provide us with a finished house on credit. In that case, we would have already lived ten years in our own house. All of our children would have been born there, and our garden would already be yielding fruits. As someone who has a dacha, you understand as no one else can what happiness it is to have one's own piece of land and one's own roof above one's head.
V. PUTIN: The housing problem was probably one of the most acute during the whole history of the Soviet Union. For as long as we can remember, we have been talking about the housing problem and the necessity of resolving it. In any case, for as long as I have been aware, as long as I can remember, this problem has been discussed.
I can repeat what I have already said. First of all, there is programme for rural youth and it will be further implemented. But it will not only be implemented according to the former terms, its framework will be extended. I will repeat once again that rural youth and economically depressed regions can receive housing 100 percent economically due to government loans, but with the right of renting the housing with the possibility of subsequently having the house for themselves.
In some regions that are self-sufficient from a financial point of view, 50 percent is provided for by the grant, and 50 percent by their own means or mortgage credit, of course designed for the long-term and with good percentage terms.
This is what we propose to do, and hope that it will work and be really noticeable for those who live in rural areas.
E. ANDREEVA: Ilya, there is still time for one more question. Please.
I. KANAVIN: That is wonderful, thank you. Please go ahead.
I. GORYAGIN: I am Igor Aleksandrovich Goryagin. I am a farmer.
Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich!
I have the following question for you. I have been engaged in this business for ten years, and therefore want to ask you such a question. Today, the production of agricultural businesses is not in demand. I have 3,000 hectares of arable land and today's crop is all lying in my warehouses. It is not wanted.
I. KANAVIN: You cannot sell it?
I. GORYAGIN: That is right, I cannot sell it. My question is this: will the state pay attention to this?
V. PUTIN: I understood you. I understood what this issue is. I understood you perfectly and this problem is well-known.
First, I must say that the practice of granting reduced credits for farms and for those who work in private part-time farms will continue. This practice will continue. Additional financial resources will be allocated so that farmers and owners of private part-time farms could take advantage of the whole system which is designed for major commodity manufacturers working in this sector of the economy. It will mean that in the future you will be able to receive credits at subsidized rates. Moreover if major commodity producers will be subsidized at two thirds of the rate, for farms and private part-time farms this subsidy can reach 95 percent. This is almost a loan free of charge.
Regarding selling, we propose that the practice of state intervention be continued and improved.
We once again have spoken about this with Cabinet members, with the financial and economic sector, and with the Agricultural Ministry. These interventions must be determined not after harvest but rather before it, and an approximate figure for which the state must redeem your production to stabilize prices for both consumers of agricultural products and for those who produce them must be determined. This is the second point.
Finally, the third point. We have allocated the necessary money to create infrastructure for functioning farms so that, like any other village business, they can reduce the dependence on wholesalers in order to create enterprises that can in a timely and opportune fashion sell their products at the required price. I repeat once again, this would reduce the dependence on unscrupulous wholesalers. These problems are understood, and the Agricultural Ministry has now completed developing these measures. I hope that by next year they will become a part of economic life.
E. ANDREEVA: Thank you Ilya. We thank all the inhabitants of the village of Golovchino who took part in the direct line with the President of Russia. And now our programme continues.
S. BRILEV: Let's go to the call centre; on the technical channel we can see how operators work. I have the impression that as soon as they have finished with one call then another comes in. Apparently, there are more and more calls.
Natalia Semenikhina has the floor.
N. SEMENIKHIN: We are gradually approaching one million, as we have already received 960 thousand calls and more than 75 thousand SMS. This year telecommunication specialists increased our lines' capacity by a third, and operators receive help from eight and a half thousand answering machines. Absolutely all the calls get put in a unified data base, which we treat equally. We will now put the next question on air.
Hello, please introduce yourself.
(Dial tone)
Unfortunately, a caller was cut off. This happens when broadcasting live. Of course, we have a call, they tell me it's from the Sverdlovsk Region, on the other line. Hello and please introduce yourself. We are listening to you.
G. SEMENOV: My name is Gennadii Demyanovich Semenov.
Good afternoon Vladimir Vladimirovich!
V. PUTIN: Good afternoon.
SEMENOV: The law on monetary compensations has been in operation for almost a year, and caused such emotional reaction. But if the outcry caused by some of the law's aspects has quitened down, some issues such as providing those on beneficiaries from social security with free medicines, the situation remains unsatisfactory in my small town and in other Russian territories. I know that frequently, this is not the responsibility of the local authorities.
We consider that in many respects it is connected with the fact that the Russian government and the Health Ministry stubbornly maintain schemes and procedures, designed to provide medicines at a reduced price, that are so unclear and inconvenient for people. Vladimir Vladimirovich, what can you say on this issue?
V. PUTIN: I agree with you that the law on monetary compensations has excited many emotions, emotions that I think are justified because despite the fact that measures had to be taken, it was necessary to make decisions that were adequate for a developing situation. Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that it frequently happens that such questions are resolved in a hurried way. I will not use strong expressions, as I do not have this right, especially on the air but, in general, you understand what I have in mind.
At the same time I would like to direct your attention to some circumstances that forced the government to make these decisions. Let's take transport provisions. As an example I will take a major city like Saint Petersburg that has a population of almost 5 million. Do you know how many people out of 5 million use free transport in Petersburg? Depending on the calculation, between 2,5 million and 2,6 million. More than half of the city's population! And in fact there are people who do not go anywhere because of their state of health, their age—people who are either very young or very old. And who paid at the time? Industry workers, doctors and teachers paid. That is to say people with modest incomes. And as only a small number of people paid, the prices for these transportations constantly grew. The governors of some regions of the Russian Federation expressly told me: «Two more years of such a situation and public transport will simply cease to exist. There will only be one private transport». In fact, this is even worse. Therefore it was necessary to resolve pressing questions. Yes, that was right. But of course, they should have been solved in a way that was much more thought through. They needed to be resolved by taking into account what would occur in some regions. In fact, many just abolished everything on the sly. And I have a lot of questions, for instance on reduced transport rates for students, especially in the regions of the Russian Federation. These questions were not addressed by Law 122. Simply on the sly, they abolished everything.
Or let's take treatment in sanatoriums and resorts. We have people who had the right to free treatment in sanatoriums. Millions of people, tens of millions, and up to 30 million people received this right and, as a matter of fact still have it. In 2003 the number of people who qualified for reductions was hardly more than 200 thousand. 30 million and 200 thousand. It is a complete disgrace. Now, over the eight months of the current year, there are already one million more people, and this is considered little. But understand the increase!
As to providing medicines here again there are a lot of gaps and many problems. But the nomenclature of these medicines increased significantly—up to two thousand names. Earlier people could simply read about these medicines in books, and today many of them have the opportunity to receive them.
Probably, to this day, a perfect system for the distribution of these reduced medicines has not appeared. I also agree with you that the Health Ministry, together with the regions of course, should look at what happens not on paper, but in real life. Of course, in these instances I shall formulate and send the appropriate impulses and signals.
S. BRILEV: We are coming to the end of the second hour of our air time. It is fair that we include the telephone centre so frequently. This really provides a sense of the country's geography, but it is unfair that until now we have not included some cities which have direct link-ups with us.
E. ANDREEVA: We will now put this right. We now have the city of Engels, of the Saratov Region, in direct link-up. Our correspondent, Sergei Semenov, is in an elite division of long-range aviation.
Sergei, we are waiting for your questions.
SERGEI SEMENOV: Hello, Vladimir Vladimirovich!
Hello Katya! Hello Sergei!
The Engels air division is the largest military base in Russia, and is where the strategic bombers TU-160 and TU-95 are deployed. Its pilots jokingly nicknamed the division «the long hand of Moscow». This is because with refuelling in the air the range of these rocket-bearing planes is virtually limitless. Now the air base works in the regular way: they are constantly prepared for action, pilots are ready to take off on order at any moment. And here, on the air field, officers who are not on military duty and their wives and children have gathered. Certainly, all officers have many questions for the Supreme Chief-Commander, as do their wives, for President Putin.
Let's move on to the questions. Who? Please.
SHAIDULIN: Deputy Commander of an Air Force Squadron, Guard Lieutenant Colonel Shaidulin.
Comrade Supreme Chief-Commander! Recently you have been often seen with the army and the navy. Not long ago you flew with our crew in a supersonic strategic bomber. Does this mean that the Military Air Forces, and the Army as a whole are becoming a governmental priority? The present situation is that many young officers and young lieutenants after finishing higher education and having served a five year term simply leave, resign. My question is this: what measures is the government preparing to take in order to raise the prestige of military service in the Armed Forces?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: You said that recently I have frequently been with the military. It seems to me that during all five plus years of work as the President of the Russian Federation I have regularly been there, since the very first year I took office. I intend to continue this, meaning it is not just working tourism, but concrete work, linked to checking the Armed Forces’ readiness to go into battle, their equipment, and resolving servicemen's social problems.
Concerning the Air Force, of course I did not participate by chance in the military exercises with your colleagues. The tragedy that happened not long ago was also part of my reason for participating. We all know that the airplane crashed and the crew died. And I believe that my participation in these exercises must be linked to the mobilisation of organizational, administrative, and, if necessary, financial resources in order to turn this page, and so that everything on which the safety of flight depends should be given utmost care and allow our strategic aircraft to function normally.
Now, regarding the Air Force as a whole. It is necessary to say—actually, I have already said this, but will repeat it—that of course I am very pleased with how the pilots worked. Even though many problems still persist, today our strategic aircraft are really up to standard. You know that I had private meetings with your colleagues, not only in a group but individual discussions. Not for long, but it was in effect possible for us to talk one-on-one for five or six minutes. And as a whole people were very frank, and worried about things. So for me it was a very useful experience to plunge not only into the problems of long-range aircraft, but the problems of the Armed Forces and the Air Force as a whole.
Certainly, in the possible future—God forbid—conflicts, we know that in today's world the Air Force occupies a special place. Unfortunately, I can say that up until know we have not given due attention to this aspect of our activity. Incidentally, some letters I receive from military pilots, even during the preparation for today's event testify to this.
But the plans for the development of the Air Force of course provide for the construction of new airplanes, including airplanes of the fifth generation. Of course, here I mean fighter planes. Plans for obtaining the newest technical equipment exist. I know about the oil problem and those of young pilots' training. I remember that many, and maybe some of those present here today, have spoken about simulators and other kinds of technical equipment required for young pilots' training.
The appropriate orders were given to the Defence Minister and the Prime Minister. Together with you, we are going to persist in working further in this direction.
To increase the prestige of the whole Armed Forces, of course we have to accomplish a whole range of tasks. This means providing material incentives and creating an image of a serviceman in the mass media and in the consciousness of the overwhelming majority of Russian citizens who corresponds to a defender of the Fatherland and each Russian family. I want to emphasise this point—the whole Fatherland and each Russian citizen. Here many different components are educational. There is no one magic pill that exists. There is a wide range of questions and problems that must be solved.
We are going to work on this whole range of issues.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Sergei, we are waiting for another question.
SERGEI SEMENOV: Questions please. And please introduce yourself.
ELEONORA LIKHACHEVA: Good afternoon. Eleonora Likhachev, wife of Major Likhachev, the Commander of the group.
Vladimir Vladimirovich, servicemen leaving office receive a housing certificate. But its value is much lower than the cost of housing, even in the secondary housing market.
Will the state do additional work on this programme and will it somehow compensate for the difference that has arisen between the certificate and housing's real cost?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: You know that young officers who now enter the Armed Forces fall within a new system of housing provisions—the mortgage system—on terms that are advantageous enough. These terms are so advantageous that in other branches we cannot yet offer these conditions, neither for citizens nor for ministries and departments which are equal to the Ministry of Defence, nor for servicemen who are equal to those working in the Ministry of Defence. It is only the servicemen in the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation who will be able to take advantage of such privileges.
The servicemen who do not fall within this system should be provided for according to the Russian Federation's legislation that is in force as they arrive in service because they cannot simply save up the corresponding sums for a mortgage in today’s situation. But the amount of money allocated to solve this problem will be considerably increased, already in 2006. And the programme of certificates will continue to operate.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Thank you. We thank an elite section of long-range Air Force, an elite division. This is the city of Engels and our correspondent Sergei Semenov.
We still have questions from the internet.
Sergei.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Yes I shall start with a question which illustrates the battle over the law on citizenship. Compared to what they thought would happen, the law’s actual application varies widely.
This question reads like this: “I am a citizen of Kazakhstan and in the near future I will go to Russia to receive citizenship according to a simplified procedure. As far as I know, the law is in force until January 1, 2006. Will it be prolonged? When speaking in the spring, you declared that Russia is interested in attracting legal immigrants (why, incidentally, did the law change?). Different regions of Russia require different documents and there is no unification. This is the main problem. All the best to you. You make us feel proud”. I am quoting what it is written in this message.
But perhaps the key phrase is that different regions of Russia require different documents, and there is no unification of the requirements for becoming a citizen.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: To attract people who choose Russia as their homeland to live permanently in the Russian Federation is Russia's strategic choice. We will do this persistently and carefully so as not to create any problems for the indigenous population and people already living in their native land. The government should find methods of attracting immigrants so as not to create problems for the indigenous population already living there. This is the first point.
The second. I agree with you that the simplification and resolution of these problems and questions needs additional regulation. Generally, the preferential regime that exists as we speak whereby our compatriots and citizens of the CIS can receive Russian citizenship will be kept after 2006. I have already given the appropriate instructions to the Presidential Executive Office and to the Government of the Russian Federation so that this will be prolonged.
Besides this we plan to take some more steps towards improving the situation in this area, namely simplifying the procedures to receive the right to work in the Russian Federation and to receive the right to stay for a long time on the Russian Federation's territory without receiving citizenship. All of these steps should allow us to solve this problem.
But I should tell you about one more thing. I believe these measures are not enough and intend to formulate an order to the Government of the Russian Federation so that the government can create a separate special additional programme so that our compatriots can return to Russia.
One of the questions I received during the preparation for today's teamwork sounds like there are hurt feelings. I do not remember who asked this question, but if this person is listening, could s/he will be able to identify her/himself. In the same direct line in 2003 I said that all who wished to leave the countries of the CIS and return to Russia have already done so. And the question shows hurt feelings, because this is not the case. I apologize. This must be, indeed, not the case. If I said so, and I do not exactly remember how I worded the answer, then I was wrong. There are definitely a great many people who would be glad to leave but who do not have the opportunity to do so. And the Government of the Russian Federation will develop and adopt the programme I just talked about, the one allowing our compatriots to return to Russia.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Another question which comes through the internet reads: “As President, can you describe your priorities in several words and then briefly comment on the state of affairs in each one?” What a paradoxical question.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Our number one and most important priority is improving the quality of life of the citizens of the Russian Federation. And there are many ways to arrive at a solution for this problem. The main condition is maintaining the Russian economy's high growth rates. It is on this base that we will resolve social issues and provide prioritized development of this or another branch.
I already spoke about how, based on the economic growth of the past few years, we are able to formulate priority answers to social problems—public health services, housing, education, and to support branches such as high-tech, agriculture, and others. All of this will be a priority in the coming years.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Those who use the internet are the advanced public, although you communicate with them indirectly, through us. Let's return to direct communication with the citizens of the country. We now have the opportunity to directly communicate with Volgograd.
Ivan Rodionov is working in Volgograd and has the floor.
IVAN RODIONOV: Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich!
Hello Ekaterina and Sergei!
We are on Mamaev Hill. This is one of the brightest, and perhaps most bitter symbols of war and victory and probably does not need to be introduced separately. Here, as the link-up reaches us, many inhabitants of Volgograd have gathered wishing to ask the President a question, and among them I see a great many veterans. Let's begin.
Please introduce yourself.
BORIS GAVRILOV: Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
BORIS GAVRILOV: I am Boris Illarionovich Gavrilov, veteran of the Great Patriotic war. I started fighting the fascists on June 22, 1941 and stopped in Prague on May 9.
The celebrations on the 60 th Anniversary of Victory this year were especially festive and exciting; it was a real national holiday. We felt proud of our homeland, we felt united and we understood the price of this great victory. But the holiday ended and life became the same again.
Vladimir Vladimirovich what can we do so that as Russians, we can always be proud of our homeland, our unity, so as to feel that great, free Russia is our real homeland?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: First of all I want to thank you for your question. Thank you for appreciating the organization of the 60th Anniversary of Victory. First of all, we owe this holiday to veterans of the Great Patriotic War, to you. Without your feats during the Great Patriotic War, this holiday would not exist.
Certainly, I will take advantage of this opportunity to thank all Russian citizens and the heads of administrative bodies in the municipalities and the regions of the Russian Federation. The holiday turned out to be a really national one. I would like to thank my colleagues and friends, the heads of countries who accepted our invitations and came to celebrate the 60th Anniversary of Victory in the Red Square in Moscow, and celebrated together with us.
Absolutely, the holiday ended but the decisions which were made concerning the veterans of the Great Patriotic War and invalids (these two categories are for all intents and purposes the same) all of them have not only been accepted, but also implemented. Let me remind you, even though you most certainly know it, that the pension of invalids of the Great Patriotic War is now more than 8,900 roubles. Those who fought in the war receive more than 8,700 roubles. In today’s system of social security, this is not heaps money but an appreciable sum on which it is possible to live. In spite of the fact that the holiday has ended, attention paid to veterans’ needs must not cease. Once again I will address the heads of the regions and municipalities—it must be so in the whole territory of the Russian Federation.
I have already spoken about this during today's meeting but I will repeat once again that, for example, providing free housing for veterans and invalids of the Great Patriotic War will be increased substantially at the federal level. Substantially. Whereas last year, around two hundred million roubles was allocated for this purpose. Next year, 2006, this will already be three billion. This money goes to the regions to resolve the problems of the veterans and invalids of the Great Patriotic War. It also concerns treatments in sanatoriums and resorts, getting free medicines, and so on. And so that not only veterans but all of us can be proud of our country we must be competitive in the world, and achieve results not only in the economy but also in resolving social issues. The contribution of veterans and their organizations is very important because up until now they have been on duty, and their influencing youth's upbringing and the new generations is very appreciable and very positive.
Thank you very much.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Let's give one more question to Volgograd.
IVAN RODIONOV: Yes, give them one more by all means, I think that we must give another question to representatives of another generation.
Please introduce yourself. And your question.
NADEZHDA MAKSIMOVA: Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich.
Nadezhda Maksimova, mother of two children, high school teacher.
I am worried about the following. Today in Russia we can see the collapse of the health system. Hospitals refuse to treat people free of charge, and the elderly are not fully provided with free medicines. Soon it will also affect children, as they are even planning to abolish paediatric medicine.
Don't we need healthy citizens in Russia?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: This is one of the most urgent problems in the social sphere of the last few years. Here I need not take away or add to anything you said. It is a correct sizing up of the situation, especially in primary care. For this reason I asked the Government to make primary health care one of the fundamental priorities in this sphere.
You know, I have already spoken about how first of all preventing diseases is impossible without improving material conditions, raising wages in this sphere, and without additional equipment for primary care hospitals. This concerns ten thousand establishments. Up until now we have not been able to do this because so far we have given everything to the municipalities who did not have the necessary funds. Practically no money from the federal level and no money from the national level reached this sector of public health services.
I will repeat it once again. The wages of average medical personnel should rise by five thousand roubles and those of doctors by ten thousand roubles. Around ten to eleven thousand clinics must be reequipped with new, modern equipment. The increase of operations performed free of charge in the high-tech centres of the Russian Federation must continue. Today we perform 60 thousand such operations and next year this should rise to 120 thousand and in 2007 again by 60 thousand, so that 180 thousand should be treated there as patients.
But so as not to increase the quantity of patients in these clinics and, on the contrary, try to reduce them, our priority will be to support primary care, including putting emphasis on vaccination. Next year, the national calendar for vaccination should be completely—a hundred percent—financed. Significant means will be allocated to the treatment of infectious diseases, including AIDS.
In addition to that, a number of new, high-tech centres that give medical aid will be constructed in the regions of the Russian Federation. At the first stage, during the first two years in 2006 and 2007, this will be in about six regions, and in 2007, 2008 this will be in about another nine regions of the Russian Federation.
Certainly, we should not forget about doctors who work in clinics which provide more qualified medical aid. This question exists and causes concern. But supposing that, actually not supposing, but stating that the primary care is catastrophically understaffed, staffed at no more than 50 percent, it is clear that today this must be an absolute priority for us.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Thank you Volgograd, but we will not leave the Southern Federal District. We still have one point for direct link-up.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Yes, we are again in contact with the south of Russia and the Black Sea city of Gelendzhik.
Evgenii Rozhkov works in Gelendzhik. Evgenii, we are waiting for questions for the President of Russia.
EVGENII ROZHKOV: Hello Katya! Hello Sergei!
Good afternoon, Vladimir Vladimirovich!
Our resort city, Gelendzhik, welcomes you.
And now for the questions. But before that I would like to say that although it is the end of September and autumn has arrived in the whole country, here it is still summer. We have enjoyed excellent air, excellent nature, and excellent water.
And now for the questions. It seems that you wanted to ask one—it is necessary to introduce yourself at the beginning.
KONSTANTIN PAPANDOPULO: Good afternoon dear Vladimir Vladimirovich! Konstantin Ivanovich Papandopulo, doctor and native of Gelendzhik.
I am very glad that over the last five or six years, and thanks to the city authorities, the city of Gelendzhik has been transformed from a country town into a European resort. We are also very glad that last year the State Council was held in our city. But, unfortunately, all the same, many Russians leave to holiday in Turkey. And here are the reasons for this. It is cheap charter flights and poor roads. And we hope that building a modern highway connecting Krasnodar with Gelendzhik will allow us to resolve many problems. It is like a “road of life.” Only the Federal Budget could cope with this. We hope that such a road will be built.
And the second question. As a doctor, its answer interests me. In your speech you promised to increase the salaries of local and family doctors by ten thousand roubles. When will this happen?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: This will begin immediately in the new year, as of 2006. These are not questions that will be put in a drawer for a long time. I hope that appropriate resources will be allocated so that when the budget comes before the State Duma there will not be any amendments which will impede the implementation of this programme. I know that key deputies, the majority of deputies of the State Duma raise these issues and demand that they be resolved, so I do not think there will be any problems here. But I will repeat once again that I think it very important that primary care clinics receive additional equipment, and that work towards disease prevention including ensuring that the country's children receive vaccination, examinations and medical check-ups must continue. First and foremost, this applies to children. All of this is high priority.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Well, one more question for Gelendzhik?
EVGENII ROZHKOV: Yes all right. On the right, on the left? I think that you wanted to ask a question? Please introduce yourself at the beginning.
POLINA POSTNOVA: Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon.
POLINA POSTNOVA: My name is Polina Postnova. I am a student of the Cuban State University. I have the following question for you.
You already mentioned the problem of reform of local self-government. I am interested in how that reform will affect our city of Gelendzhik, seeing as we are not only a small city, but also a resort.
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: What in particular worries or disturbs you? Could you formulate your concern more precisely?
POLINA POSTNOVA: How will the given reform affect the development of our resort? Which measures and ways of implementing the reform will be undertaken in our resort?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: First of all, I want to congratulate the inhabitants of the Krasnodarsky Region for having such beautiful female students. With the sea as background and good weather it looks simply wonderful.
Second, the whole reform of local authorities and local self-government is to ensure that the local authorities will not have any financial or social obligations which are not provided for either from their own financial resources and tax revenues or not financed from budgets from higher levels—either the regional or the federal level. We want to finish with the state of affairs where citizens know that they are entitled to something, but the local authorities say that they do not have the money to provide it. Such a situation should not exist. That is the first point. But this concerns all reforms of local self-government.
And secondly, regarding what directly affects resort zones. Our colleague who just asked a question, spoke about the development of infrastructure. We intend to further develop the infrastructure in the south of the Russian Federation. First and foremost, this refers to building roads and airports. The airport, the road, the railroad, including the road that links Gelendzhik with Krasnodar and Gelendzhik with Sochi, the road to Rostov, the road between Rostov and Moscow, and the development of the airports in Sochi, Gelendzhik and Krasnodar. All of this will take place, and there will also be the possibility of creating recreational zones with a special, preferential regime. The government envisages this possibility and together with the regional and municipal authorities must determine where these zones will be. Maybe in the Krasnodarsky Region as well. But if not there, then where? The question arises where in the Krasnodarsky Region? This problem must be resolved through dialogue with the governor and with the heads of municipalities.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Evgenii, another question please.
EVGENII ROZHKOV: So, are we really going to get into it? You have such a bright shirt—it matches the scenery here. Please introduce yourself, and ask the President your question looking into that video camera.
ALEXEI RASTORGUEV: Good afternoon Mr President.
My name is Alexei Rastorguev. I am extremely happy and proud to live in the fine city of Gelendzhik.
You have been in our city many times. What was most pleasant for you, and what will you remember the most?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: More than anything, of course, the very amiable people who are both welcoming and amiable. Judging from the results in Krasnodarsky Region and Gelendzhik, here in particular people are very hardworking and able to organize their work. I know that there is also concern regarding the development of an oil and gas installation. This disturbs many people who would like to see Gelendzhik remain exclusively a recreational zone, a resort. But historical developments have turned out in such a way that an oil refinery was not constructed by us, but has already existed here for many decades. Unfortunately, during previous decades practically no attention was paid to ecological problems. With the arrival of the state's company—a company with state capital—and with the settlement of property problems and questions, places for additional capital investments were created. First of all, the plan was not to expand production but rather to improve production bases and resolve economic issues. You know how at the time so much stuff just got in the soil, simply ended up somewhere. Now, this is simply not possible. Of course, we will think of the resort's development and what I talked about just now.
In general sea, sun, people and the economy's development in the directions that are priorities for Gelendzhik and for southern Russia should make Gelendzhik and all of southern Russia even more attractive.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Thank you Gelendzhik. It is a pity to leave such a sunny city.
But we are going to Moscow. The weather here is not so good, but there are many calls to the telephone centre.
SERGEI BRILEV: Let's go, Natasha. Perhaps one last time during this live broadcast we will join the telephone centre. What news, what statistics and which calls?
NATALIA SEMENIKHINA: It is hot here. Several minutes ago we passed the one million mark and more than 130 thousand telephone calls have been taken during air time. And it is very nice to see that students and schoolchildren are very active today.
Regarding questions via SMS, we have already received one hundred thousand. During the live broadcast more than 60 thousand SMS arrived.
A big thank you to the operators who are already in their fifth day of communicating with all of Russia. And though we cannot put all the questions on the air, there is one important question that is being answered. What is the country living for today? Especially as calls frequently come in from places where there are no sociologists. But we will make conclusions after the end of the live broadcast.
And now they tell me that we are linked with Naberezhnye Chelny.
Hello.
ALEXANDER TOKMAKOV: Hello.
NATALIA SEMENIKHINA: Please introduce yourself and ask your question.
ALEXANDER TOKMAKOV: My name is Alexander Sergeevich Tokmakov. I am calling you from the city of Naberezhnye Chelny.
I have the following question. Is Vladimir Vladimirovich confident that all of his orders are properly executed and that there is no sabotage done by officials or different levels of the country's authorities?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I will answer one part of the question by saying that I am confident that no sabotage is occurring.
The second part I will answer in the negative. I am not confident that all my orders are being executed properly. The country is big, has many problems, has a legal system which lacks reglementation, chronic and unresolved social problems, and there is a rather low level of legal culture for those who are obliged to execute state functions both in the centre, in the localities and in the regions. In general, of course I do not have the confidence that everything is properly executed. But knowing this, I think that I should simply personally pay this question more attention and more carefully tackle the question of how all decisions are made, taken to their logical conclusion, and realized.
SERGEI BRILEV: Natasha, are there any calls right now?
NATALIA SEMENIKHINA: We will try to put one more call on the air. Hello.
SHARKAN SEISHA: Hello Vladimir Vladimirovich. I am calling from Sochi. I am Sharkan Talibovna Seisha, 46 years old, an employee. I have the following question.
In this country, life expectancy is less than the retirement age. The question of raising the retirement age is now being discussed. Please explain on what basis the retirement age could be increased?
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Yes, this really is a question that increasingly appears in the mass media and is discussed by experts. Of course the interest in this question is linked to demography, and whether the number of people working can support the increase in the number of retired people. This can create certain problems for the Pension Fund and for other structures involved in this question.
There is another argument, or rather not an argument but an element in this discussion. It is that the level of life expectancy in Russia is much lower than say, in Europe, where the decision has been taken to raise the retirement age. This is what I personally think the question is connected to.
First of all, our population's life expectancy really is lower, but it is not lower for people who have reached retirement age. The “life term”--this expression is not a pretty one, but is the one that experts use to describe this concept —in Russia is more or less the same as in the advanced countries, say in Europe or in America. Certainly a little lower, but more or less the same. But overall living standards and the length of life are much lower because many people die at an able-bodied age, young, and in the middle of their lives. And this is due to alcohol, drugs, work-place accidents, road and transport incidents and the badly organised systems of public health services that we have already talked about today. All of this combined creates these problems.
At the same time I want to draw your attention to the fact that I am against raising the retirement age. And while I am President, such a decision will not be taken. In general I think that it is not necessary to raise the age at which one retires. You must stimulate people who think that even after attaining the retirement age they can continue working depending on their health condition. To stimulate and create the conditions whereby people are interested in continuing their work is possible, but not to infringe on their rights as retirees.
Once again I will repeat that I am against raising the retirement age both for men and women.
SERGEI BRILEV: Well, thank you to Natalia Semenikhina and thank you to the telephone centre. But just because we leave the telephone centre does not mean that the questions have come to an end.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: Yes. Since we prepared this direct line, already now we can say that the first preliminary results were more than a million calls and, as Natalia said, more than a hundred thousand SMS came to the call centre and more than 50 thousand questions over the internet. It is gratifying to see that many sharp and clever questions come from young people. Clearly, it is impossible to grasp the immensity of this. And how many questions were you able to look at when preparing for this programme?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: A whole lot! But I did not count. I must say that yesterday for a long time I basically was reading these questions. And I can tell you at once that of course I could not look at everything, despite the fact that I sat until long after midnight with these documents. But there were many different questions, including those where “I am confident that they will not show you this question” was written at the end. No selection was made, and everything that arrived by the time of the broadcast lay on my table. But it was simply not possible to look at everything. If you consider that now is the time when it is possible for me to answer those that I have selected, then I will.
YEKATERINA ANDREYEVA: That would be desirable.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I too did not exactly select them, but I will successively read the questions which seem to me covered frequently recurring themes.
Irina Petrovna Cherepanov, the Ivanov Region. Widow, two young children, an adult daughter. Up until the monetary compensation law they bought reduced travel cards for pupils. Now these do not exist any more. This is a very long question and I will quote certain passages of it. “Pensioners also do not receive a transport supplement after the monetary compensation, and absolutely the same applies to reduced travel cards. The local administration told me that the regional budget does not provide for such services. There is no one else we can turn to but you. The governors begrudge rural school children their money. Yours sincerely, on behalf of all the parents of the village of New Leushino Cherepanova, Irina Petrovna”.
The first thing I would like to say in connection with this regards providing transportation at a reduced rate to certain categories of citizens and pensioners. The categories of citizens who should qualify for reductions should be clear—we talked about this, and of how people had the possibility of choosing whether to either receive money, or to get a transport card at a reduced price which does not exceed the sum which people are receiving as compensation. It was necessary to achieve the condition in which people would not see their situation in this area get worse. For pensioners who used reductions, but were not considered eligible for reductions as such, a decision was made to increase their pension by 240 roubles and there was an arrangement with the heads of the regions so that they will have reduced transport tickets that do not exceed this increase in the pension. If this has not been done in the Ivanov region then obviously the governor and all the people working in this area have not done their work.
Regarding the abolition of reductions for pupils' travel costs, it is completely their private initiative. They took this decision on the sly using Law 122, a decision which in my opinion is ill-advised and should be reconsidered.
There is a question from Sweden concerning the possibility of using the Stabilization Fund for both child benefits and for helping those who want to have children. I have already spoken about the State Duma's initiative that will be maintained. I simply do not think it is necessary to come back to this once again.
And now, Evgenii Ivanovich Norenko, Primorskii Krai. The question is about United Russia. It says: “At the present time the functioning authority does not have serious opposition. Do you not think that presently this creates the conditions for absence of control of functioning authorities and secondly, a step back for the development of a democratic state? All of us lived under the rule of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and all know how it ended.
Thank you."
Dear Evgenii Ivanovich, I want to remind you of the fact that the Communist party of the Soviet Union inserted their monopoly on power into the Soviet Union's constitution where it was named leader and the controlling political force. But strictly speaking, other political forces did not exist. As a matter of fact, there was only one legal opposition in the Soviet Union, and that was the Russian Orthodox Church. There was no other legal opposition in the Soviet Union.
Regarding United Russia, indeed today it is the dominant political force in the country and in the State Duma, but this is a normal phenomenon for all democratic countries. Those parties who win elections, who receive the greatest quantity of votes get to the power. It is hard to agree that they do not have opponents. Yes, they make their decisions based on the majority of votes, but they have enough opponents. This is Vladimir Volfovichem Zhirinovsky—the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, and Motherland which has broken up but actively criticizes the functioning authorities in general and United Russia in particular. Finally, there is the Communist Party of the Russian Federation which has been the opposition of the system during all these years. Therefore the danger of returning to a monopoly of authority does not exist.
Alexander Olegovich Zhuchenko, Sverdlovsk Region.
“I am a hearing invalid; I can't hear. Millions of deaf people, and there are 13 million of them, never learn what you are talking about today, tomorrow, in the news, or on New Year's Eve. Can you resolve this non-fulfilment of our constitutional rights at the governmental level.”
I entirely agree with Alexander Olegovich. Last night, having received this question, I discussed it with the head of state television. And it is being worked on. And at least in the state's mass media, this situation will be rectified.
Nina Ivanovna Vasileva, the Tver Region.
"I am a mother of four children. I have four grandsons. I am interested in when they will stop constructing slot machines in our city. All children and adults are already playing.” I don’’t think I need to read any further.
I completely agree with Nina Ivanovna. The question is a very pointed one and has already arisen many times both with the governors and the heads of the Russian Federation's regions. I gave the Russian government an assignment. I know that deputies in the State Duma of the Russian Federation are also paying attention to this matter. In the near future the appropriate decisions will be prepared. I hope that this will normalize the situation in this area. I agree with you that at the present the situation is developing in a way that is inadmissible from the point of view of the protection of citizens' interests.
M. L. Sporysheva, Nizhni Novgorod: "Thank you to the President for the new governor".
Thank you for this gratitude. The new governor has not done anything good so far. But he is an experienced, reliable leader who has proved that he can effectively work in Moscow. I hope that he will prove himself once again in Nizhny Novgorod.
A question about mortgage. I have already spoken about this a great deal. I do not think that we will go over this again in the interests of saving time.
“Is the President pleased with the school reform? He himself studied free of charge”.
If the question is about the unified state examination, this is presently being carried out as an experiment. As a whole, all the actions in this sphere are directed towards creating equal conditions for young people to enter institutes of higher learning independently of the territory on which they live. And I must say that the experiment seems to be justifying itself. But since the experiment is still being carried out I can only say this much. We propose that this be tried in other Russian regions as well.
At the same time I agree with those heads of institutes of higher education of the Russian Federation who believe that the obvious advantages of a traditional university education in Russia should be kept, despite the dissemination of the unified state examination.
I have already talked about the fact that we propose some changes in the sphere of education as a whole. It will be one of the priorities in the near future. I spoke in particular about education in the institutes of higher learning. I can say more about education in schools.
First: additional payment to teachers for class management in fully subscribed classes, an increase of a thousand roubles from what teachers currently receive. This is the first. I started with this because it will affect all teachers, almost all teachers.
Second: giving one hundred thousand rouble grants to the ten thousand best teachers in the country.
Third: determining grants for three thousand schools at a rate of one million roubles annually to purchase additional laboratory equipment, textbooks and maintain the educational process.
In addition to this, we expect to create five thousand grants of 60 thousand roubles annually for schoolchildren and students, those who are interested in long-range research work.
All of this, together with the opportunity and necessity of changing the system of payment in schools can result in—and in my opinion should result in—improvements. When I talk about change in the system of payment I mean the possibility of changing to a system of sectorial payment in the schools whereby the teachers' wages do not depend only and so much on the number of lessons they teach, but rather on the quality of their teaching, their experience, and other factors. But let me repeat that this would not be connected to the work load which will eventually also weigh on schoolchildren, on whom we consistently pile a heavier and heavier work load. In my opinion, in many cases this load has already gone over the limit.
I repeat that all these measures are directed towards improving the education system.
“What will change by 2008? Will the army be reformed? What awaits my 16-year old son? Elizaveta Viktorovna Slepneva, Kursk Region”.
Elizaveta Viktorovna, as of January 1, 2008 military service will be reduced from two years to 12 months. I will repeat once again that after six months in so-called training, each young man can make a choice whereby either he signs a contract and goes on contractual service for the next three years or he completes six months of service in the standing troops. We hope that the conscription contingent will also improve. Following from that, whoever signs the three-year contract will have the priority right to enter institutions of higher education. For those who cannot enter right away, they will keep the right to receive wages, a monetary compensation, for contract military service during the year in which they will study in classes that have been specially organized to help them prepare for college. Yes, and by the same time Rapid Reaction Forces will be completely formed, namely the marines, all ofthe paratroopers, and some parts of the land forces. Young people conscripted for military service will not serve in any “hot spots” including in the Chechen Republic.
Yes, and as to the army. As of this year there are no conscripted soldiers in the Chechen Republic. And as of 2007 there will not be anyone from the internal troops of the Interior Ministry of the Russian Federation.
Pensioner Ludmila Karachentsova from the Degtyarevsky hamlet of the Kochubeevsky area, Stavropol Region complained to the President that there is no water in their village. "Alas, no water is present here" was how Ludmila Alekseevna sadly described the situation in a quotation from Komsomolskaya Pravda “even though I heard that money for aqueducts has arrived in Stavropol. Where has it gone to? Villagers have to go two to three hundred metres for water”.
Naturally, it is clear that Ludmila Karachentsova is dissatisfied with the how the situation was handled or, to say it clearly, with the lack of a solution to this problem. I must tell you that it is just in these days that nominations for the position of Governor of the Stavropol Region are being discussed. I have prepared the documents for the governor in office, but until he solves this problem, they will not be sent to Stavropol.
Stanislav Veniaminovich Vengrezhinsky : "Please tell me if pensions for military retirees will be increased? If so, when and by how much?
As of January 1, 2006 they will be increase by 15 percent, the same as all servicemen's. After this, according to the provisions in the corresponding law, the increase in pensions is envisioned during the period that follows, together with the increase in the monetary provisions for servicemen.
Anton Yurevich Zotov: "Having heard your speech on television on the increasing of doctors' and teachers' wages, my wife and I cheered up”. And what follows is his disappointment since the author of this question is a doctor, a neurosurgeon and the increases don't affect him.
Yes, I understand your concern, but as I have already said, our primary care is staffed at 56 percent and in rural areas this percent only reaches 25 to 30. This is an absolutely intolerable situation and today, this is literally our main priority. But it does not mean that the state should forget people who work in the fields of high-level medical help, and providing high-tech help that demands special knowledge. Certainly, we are planning to move forward in this sphere as well. I have already spoken about the new hi-tech centres that we plan to open in the regions of the Russian Federation. Certainly, it is necessary to think of increasing wages in this sphere in general.
Alexei Leontevich Matveev. Kostroma Region. “It is known that as of January 1, 2006 all the recipients of the Hero of the Great Patriotic War medal will receive a pension of approximately 20 thousand roubles. What about us—the recipients of the Hero of Socialist Labour medal? All Heroes of the Kostroma Region join me in asking this question. Thank you”.
Dear Alexei Leontevich, I gave the order to the Government of the Russian Federation so that together with the State Duma they could prepare a bill supporting the Heroes of Socialist Labour. I expect that these decisions will be made in the near future. Perhaps it will not be of the same amount as those for the Heroes of Russia and of the Soviet Union but it will also be an exclusive decision regarding the merits of the Heroes of Socialist Labour for our country.
Vasilii Urov Sergeevich, Saint Petersburg. "What do you think of the problem of the HIV epidemic in Russia? Why is so little money from the budget allocated for this problem?”
Many people are worried about this problem both within state structures, public organizations and in society at large. And it is correct to be worried. The last research on the topic and statistical data show that indeed, while the problem is very grave, it cannot be called an epidemic. This is shown by mass examinations of citizens at conscription age, women in maternity hospitals, and several other categories of the population. But you are right, this problem is a serious one. Therefore we will provide a sizeable increase in financing for these purposes next year. Whereas in the current year only 130 million roubles—and for Russia as a whole this is practically nothing—next year this will be increased by 20 to 30 times. To this effect, we plan to allocate up to three billion roubles so that all those requiring expensive medicines can be provided with them.
Viktor Anatolevich Ershov. “Between 1961 and 1964 I served in Sakhalin and in border troops for three and a half years. I became bald. I have done my duty to my motherland. So why (here I will leave out part of the question) have these three years not been included in my pension record? I think that this is theft on the part of the state ".
Military service in the Armed Forces should be included in the record according to the Law on Labour Pensions. Dear Viktor Anatolevich, you should address the bodies of the Pension Fund. They are obliged to assist you in recalculating your pension.
Evgeniya Ivanova Zemlyanukhina. “I am a veteran of the Great Patriotic War. In 1968 my family and I constructed a cooperative apartment in a five-floor, apartment building”—here I will leave a bit out— “now we have to pay for the land on which our building stands. Many of our husbands died, and we are left alone. Please explain whether we have to pay the whole cost of the land or only pay the renewal of the documents? Saratov Region”.
Dear Evgenya Ivanovna and other inhabitants of the Saratov Region who find themselves in this position. If the situation described here is true, than the despotism of your officials knows no bounds. According to the current legislation, all apartments, and the land under these cooperative houses is already your property. They are obliged to renew it at their own expense. The question regarding the cadastral evaluation and the payment for this evaluation could still be asked, but I believe that both the regional and municipal authorities can solve this problem themselves, and are simply obliged to do so without demanding funds from the citizens. This question is very surprising to me. I will ask the Governor to pay attention to it.
Here is a question that arrived by SMS.
“The country is full of gas. We sell gas right and left, but half of Russia has no access to gas. Somehow this seems dishonest. Vladimir Vladimirovich, what do you value most in life?”
It is a question which demands big investments and time to solve. It is simply necessary to build. Certainly, we must build more.
Let me remind you that we are far from exporting and selling a major amount of the gas. But by virtue of the fact that abroad we can sell a thousand cubic metres for 160 dollars or even more, and inside Russia this price is a little more than 30 dollars and 40 dollars in certain regions, you can imagine the difference this makes. Gazprom exists because of this difference. If it develops, and discovers new deposits and has the opportunity to install gas distribution infrastructure and give those power resources to the economy and domestic consumers for low prices inside Russia, it is due to this export. But necessary efforts for further development of the gas infrastructure should be made.
For these purposes in the very near future Gazprom plans to allocate significant means exceeding 35 billion roubles (the amount it has been until now) many times over. I am confident that these plans will be implemented. We are now studying them together with the heads of the regions of the Russian Federation.
Kamil Tagirovich Mukhamedzyanov. Kamil Tagirovich completely reproduces one of my answers from 2003. It concerns providing textbooks to schools and the supporting whole scholastic process by transferring these issues from the municipal to the regional level because in our country, this is already state level. I must say that Kamil Tagirovich formulates this proposition very precisely and literally restates both what I said in 2003 and the corresponding citations from the Constitution which guarantee the right to education and so on.
Kamil Tagirovich talks about the low wages in the school system. He is about to get married to someone who, as far as I understand, is a young teacher. “At present the situation is such that I cannot even afford a pair of wedding rings”.
He asks what has been done lately, including what I have personally done to implement the plans that were already made in 2003.
Dear Kamil Tagirovich! At the beginning of 2003, according to the legislation in force, neither the regional authorities nor the municipal authorities had the right to offer their support to schools even if they had the possibility and desire to do so. In 2003, we changed the legislation and those changes came in to force in that same year. And now everything which affects the educational process in schools can be realized and supported at the state level. This is exactly the theme on which I have spoken and I will repeat once again that in this area the problem has been resolved. But it is resolved only from the point of view of creating the legal bases for resolving these questions. In some regions where there is enough money—in rich regions—the regional authorities definitely resolve a great many questions including purchasing textbooks. This is not the case in all regions. And unfortunately, in the majority of the Russian Federation's regions many parents still spend a lot of money procuring these textbooks. Therefore in this area, although some questions have been resolved, solutions are still being implemented. I hope that despite the fact that material difficulties exist, you will get married. I hope that this will not be a reason for you to not execute your vows.
Regarding teachers salaries, they are indeed very low. We must recognize this.
Just before this, I already spoke about what we propose to do in this sphere. Today the situation varies greatly depending on the region. For example, in Moscow the average teacher's salary can go up to 10,000 roubles. In some northern areas such as Taimyre, it is up to 15,000, and in the south of Russia it is very low. In some places it approaches 3,000 and sometimes no more than 2,000. In your region, and I understand it you come from the Amur Region, there the average wage is 5,200. But there is a problem for young teachers as they have absolutely inadmissibly low wages, and very bad starting positions. Of course this situation must be rectified. Let me remind you that in 2002 the average salary was 2,800. And today, according to measurements done in August of this year, the average salary was 4,860. Let me repeat that this average applies to the country as a whole. At the end of next year, the minimum will be 6,000. As I already said, changing to a new system of payment for teachers will take place in the whole branch.
And the last question. Ilya Ilyich Postnov, Moscow: "As a student in tenth grade at high school and a potential recruit for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation I cannot help be but excited about problems of the servicemen. My appearance is not one hundred percent Slavic, but on all other criteria I basically have exactly what it takes to become a Kremlin guard. My question is as follows: why does the Kremlin Regiment only accept people with a Slavic appearance? Do you not think this is discrimination along national lines”.
Dear Ilya Ilyich, I am not aware that the Kremlin Regiment only recruits people of Slavic appearance. After receiving your question, I asked the Director of the Federal Guard Service and he assured me that the Kremlin Regiment recruits basically in all regions of the Russian Federation, and that there are only two criteria. These are health and height. If you meet the criteria which are required to be a serviceman, then this problem is solved.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Vladimir Vladimirovich, today you speak and speak and speak but, on behalf of the organizers, we would like to permit ourselves one additional question.
Before this we usually met with you in December at the end of the year and developed the plans for the coming year. Now, it is possible to speak at the beginning of the political season which, incidentally, appeared somewhat rough. September is a rough political season. So I will slightly alter the traditional question for the plans for the coming year. Rather, my question concerns the plans for the current and forthcoming political season. What are your expectations?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: You know, I recollect one of the questions that was asked. We now have new possibilities to solve pressing social questions and to pay special attention to some sectors of the economy due to the economic results we have achieved, the fact that our budgetary expenses look solid, there is valuable support from the Stabilization Fund, as well as gold and exchange currency reserves of the Central bank. Huge resources are being allocated to this effect, in an area where the state has never allocated such resources before. And here it is necessary to fine tune our control over the implementation of decisions we have made. This is very important.
And of course, we must look to the future. In fact, please note that we are adopting the budget for three years. We do this expressly so that at the end of 2007 and the beginning of 2008 when the country will clearly have to live through a period of political activity, that there will not be an explosion of populist decisions that would destroy the positive economic tendencies that we have developed. We want to eliminate this possibility, and coordinate our actions with parliament and within the framework of this corridor so as not to end up in a situation in which, after we spent a lot of time accumulating the money, it would suddenly all be distributed. Yes, it is possible to distribute all this money today. First, no one would feel it, because there is not as much as it seems.
And secondly, inflation will instantly appear. And this would be an absolutely nonsensical act of political populism that would harm the economy and, in turn, each Russian family. Our task is to keep these positive economic tendencies and to attain the priorities that we have set out for ourselves, so that these priorities will not only be described, but that actual financial, administrative and political resources be employed to accomplish these tasks.
SERGEI BRILYOV: As you see, I was afraid to ask about the whole year and confined my question to the political season, but the answer covered all three years.
YEKATERINA ANDREEVA: Vladimir Vladimirovich, we thank you for participating in our programme. Our Direct Line with the President of the Russian Federation has come to an end. Our cameras were in 12 major cities and small towns. We thank all the people who took part in this Direct Line and all those who sent in questions via SMS, via the internet, and those who managed to phone in to the call centre.
Thank you very much.
SERGEI BRILYOV: Thank you very much. All the best.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Thank you.

WebErr
October 27th, 2006, 07:58 AM
This is another point of view.

Anna Politkovskaya and the Self-Defense of Democracy
By Jon Hellevig
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/2006-236-28.cfm


The writer is a Finnish lawyer who has lived in Moscow for 15 years. He has written the book Expressions and Interpretations (www.hellevig.ru (http://www.hellevig.ru/)) discussing Russia's social development from the viewpoint of philosophy and judicial philosophy. He is also the author of several books on the Russian tax and labor law. The murder of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya has once again induced a surge of anti-Russianism in Finland. Politicians, so-called researchers and media declare that Russian leaders masterminded the murder. Many people cautiously avoid these direct expressions, while being highly critical of the Russian government. Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja falls somewhere between the two groups, whereas Markku Kivinen from the University of Helsinki affiliated Aleksanteri Institute and MP Heidi Hautala clearly belong to the latter. It is obviously not in the interests of the Russian President to have a well known journalist killed (pointing this out would not be necessary, but for the continuous smear campaign against Russia). Based on information I received from Jukka Mallinen (translator of Politkovskaya's "Putin's Russia" into Finnish), there were no Russian government officials behind the murder. On the other hand, there is reason to put forward an alternative motive, which is quite possible -- that the murder was orchestrated by those wishing to create the kind of public opinion climate to compliment an anti-Russian agenda.
In our culture, we usually honor the memory of the deceased by saying positive things about the departed in times of sorrow. One would like to show the same respect for Politkovskaya as well. But I cannot keep quiet when I see how her memory has been turned into a weapon to hit the Russian people in a manner that hinders Russia's development.
Some are not happy with the opportunities that have been created during Putin's presidency.This includes the chance for many to now actively participate in a democratically run market economy. Upon the Soviet breakup, criminal elements took advantage of the weakness of a young nascent democracy by grabbing and stealing enormous possessions. Putin, courageously challenged the Mafia and oligarchs (often separated through a fine line drawn on water).
Thirsty for "revenge", some of the non-Russian former Soviet states egg on the EU to engage Russia in a confrontational manner They overlook that Russia and the Russian people were the biggest victims of communism. Led by Yeltsin, the Russian people freed themselves from that burden and encouraged this spirit to other former prisoner-countries. Due to Russia's large land mass encompassing troubled regions, Russia unwillingly gets drawn into dirty games. This predicament gets twisted into the claim of a revanchist Russia bullying small, defenseless others.
Given the uncritical fanfare accorded to Politkovskaya's work as a journalist, there is reason to critically review it. A case in point is her book "Putin's Russia", (published in 2004) which has been translated into several languages.
In this book, she emotionally focuses on peoples' life situations (a style used in Karl Marx's Das Kapital, where he childishly tries to prove his theories of capital through the stories of people's everyday lives). Politkovskaya begins and ends her book with a stated disgust of Putin (as per the English translation of the book, see the Introduction as well as pages 281 and 282). She states her dislike of Putin "because he was a product of the Russian security service" (as if George Bush Sr.'s politics should be condemned on the grounds that he headed the CIA; a prevalent talking point in some circles). According to Politkovskaya, the KGB influenced Putin "does nothing but destroy civil liberties as he has all through his career". No mention is made of Putin's support for the late democratic mayor of St. Petersburg, Anatoly Sobchak. At the end, Politkovskaya states she is disgusted with Putin because there is a war in Chechnya (as if he started it). She adds that in her view, he is a cold, cynical, racist, who is prone to lying (among other references in her book, see pages 281-82). Politkovskaya does not like the fact that this evil (in her view) man goes to Easter church services (pages 279 and 280).
Politkovskaya attacks Putin for being a "racist" and then like a racist claims that Silvio Berlusconi as a European has better powers of thinking than Russia's Putin (page 279).
Politkovskaya's likening of Putin with Stalin (page 272) shows that neither the journalist nor her prize givers and back patters have any sense of proportion. But one should remember that the purpose of this investigative journalist was to tell us about her feelings on why she abhors another person.
Politkovskaya displayed no perception that all phenomena in society are based on social practices and that only a positive historical process can promote the wellbeing of society. She does not understand that the basis of a working society was totally destroyed in the Soviet Union and that it was not until 1990 that the building of a democracy, market economy and society at large was started from the ruins of the bankrupt Soviet estate. Through glimpses of peoples' life experiences, she brings up some of Russia's problems, such as the undeveloped democracy, criminality, corruption, the poor condition of the army, low pensions and the state of the judicial system. In her state of disgust, Politkovskaya did not analyze what has been done about these matters during Putin's presidency. Nor does she consider the impact of decisions taken under him. Instead, she writes of human tragedies like the suicide of an alcoholic and about a former friend of hers; a busy businesswoman who went into politics to grab more riches, etc. She tries to convince the reader that Putin is to be blamed for a tragic suicide and a woman politician's ruthlessness (who succeeded remarkably well). Politkovskaya's idea was that from day one of his presidency, Putin alone had to make sure that all in Russia was right. Much like if President Tarja Halonen was responsible for the unemployment in Kainuu and drunks at Hakaniemi Market Square.
In one of her brief accounts, Politkovskaya mentions an 80 year old man, who had been found frozen to a floor in Irkutsk, Siberia (page 194). The journalist says the emergency services refused to come to the rescue claiming "the man was so old he could obviously not be all right". According to Politkovskaya - Putin should have stopped this. She seemingly suggests that it was brave of her to have said as much.
Politkovskaya writes of an impoverished former navy captain Aleksey Dikinin (page 198). His fate is attributed to Putin (with Politkovskaya having the guts to say so). She does not even think of referencing Soviet Communism as the main culprit Mind you, her chronicling of Dikinin was in the first year of Putin's presidency (2000). Since then, there has been an enormous increase in pensions. I have personally experienced this in the Russian hinterland. At the beginning of this year, I visited a friend of mine in the native village of Azikeevo, situated in the Ural Mountains region of Bashkortostan. A road connection to Azikeevo was opened about ten years ago, at approximately the same time that gas and heating systems were installed. A couple of years ago, phone connections were completed to every cottage. Without any prompting, my friend's 70 year old uncle repeatedly lauded how good living conditions had become. In a healthy spirit, this senior citizen regularly takes care of horses, cows and chickens. Some retired teachers in that village (a married couple) said that pensions were now so good that they could support their children's families (there is a photo report of this trip at www.hellevig.ru).
Politkovskaya was far from expert on government, military and legal matters. Topics which Putin has frequently discussed in an openly candid way.
Politkovskaya's writing on terrorist dramas sugarcoated the actions of terrorists. Through their deeds, terrorists try to hurt the society they hit. By killing innocent people, they create public discussion designed to fault the leaders of the target country (reference how terrorists sparked a change in government in Spain). This is incomprehensible logic for a sound person to comment on.
In "Putin's Russia", Politkovskaya blames Putin for government corruption in Ekaterinburg. There is no acknowledgement on her part that this political environment was evident BEFORE Putin became president. Putin proposed to correct this by having the political center play a more active role with the outlying regions. Instead of lauding this action (a popular one with most Russians), Politkovksaya wrongly concluded it to be anti-democratic. A stance overlooking how the political center was more democratic than the most "independent" of Russian regions. The regional governors operated under the cloak of democracy. They were chosen through "democratic" elections, as in the Soviet Union (in another connection, Politkovskaya remembered how people were elected in the Soviet Union, page 271). A colorful bunch of criminals and adventurers appointed themselves as governors under the shelter of formal electing and voting procedures. This view is acknowledged by the European Commissioner for Human Rights (see: Alvaro Gil-Robles, Report on Visits to the Russian Federation, 2004). In these conditions, anyone wanting to be governor had himself elected by using threats, bribes, blackmail and bodily harm. Putin's proposal to strip the regional governors of their mandates made a positive impression. Democracy is now practiced in much more civilized circumstances, based on a democratic competition between the regional parliament and the president. To have the courage to rise against a powerful elite and to succeed is an unbelievably big achievement. In the West, this reality is not fully appreciated, let alone understood. Instead, Politkovskaya's blinded disgust with Putin is uncritically accepted as the gospel.
Politkovskaya characterizes Putin as seeking "revenge" against the oligarchs. Her characterization of the Mikhail Khordorkovsky owned and operated YUKOS is flawed (pages 275, 276, 284 and 285). She erroneously claims that this business entity "operated in daylight" and "gave five percent of its profits to charity". YUKOS flagrantly violated tax laws and other legislation through (among other things) criminal tax paradise companies (I reference a Sitra Report: Suuri Maa Pitka Kvartaali, Big Country Long Quartile, 2005).
Furthermore, Politkovskaya claims that Khodorkovsky got into trouble with Putin because he supported "the liberal opposition". She omits the fact that Khodorkovsky supported the Communist Party. The romantic side of her activity would be lost if this point was made. She did not state the ulterior motive behind Khodorkovsky's political activism. The "democratic" parties sold him top positions in electoral candidate lists to enable him to place his own trusted candidates. This was how he planned to carry through a takeover of the Russian Duma. But is this the kind of democracy desired by Politkovskaya, Tuomioja and Hautala? In Finland, this advocacy would be considered treason.
A number of anti-Putin analysts admit that former YUKOS CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky had committed crimes, while rhetorically asking "but why Khodorkovsky, just Khodorkovsky"? The answer is clear: others were quicker to realize that their criminal activities in Russia were over. A society cannot be built on revenge. Putin offered an invitation for all to move forward. Russia loses if there is a large scale injustice. This does not mean that democracy has no right to self-defense. This is Putin's Russia, and mine.

________________________

P.S. Is something wrong?

WebErr
October 27th, 2006, 08:13 AM
How I learned to love Vlad

President Putin is far from being everyone's ideal head of state. But, says Nick Paton Walsh, returning home after four years as the Guardian's Moscow correspondent, he has to be credited with saving Russia from collapse

Monday July 31, 2006
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1834009,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1
As it feels like a sin, then this must be a confession. I have been in Moscow for four and a half years, reporting on the presidency of Vladimir Putin - its slow erosion of democratic freedoms, its savage disregard for the individual, its petro-dollar arrogance. I've been reflexively critical, due to the obvious truth that the battered Russian people deserve something better. They have done for centuries. But now my time here has come to an end, I need to confess: I am becoming something of a Putin fan. I have witnessed many things that make this stance unsupportable: the morgue near Beslan that, on September 4 2004, smelled of 186 dead, burned and contorted schoolchildren after a bungled military siege; the hostages dragged unconscious on October 23 2002 from the Nord Ost theatre in Moscow after another siege, and dumped on their backs by emergency workers to choke on their tongues in the early-morning snowfall; Putin sitting alongside Ukraine's Viktor Yanukovich at a Soviet-style military parade on October 28 2004, days before Yanukovich tried to steal the presidential election; Lubov Tkach, the wife of a Russian miner who disappeared during an accident, sitting in November 2003 near a large pile of coal in her one-room flat, ill and unable to afford medicine but watching a huge colour TV that had been bought for her in compensation.

Article continues (http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,1834009,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1#article_continue)http://image.guardian.co.uk/Ads/MPU/arrow9x7.gif
&lt;a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&amp;amp;spacedesc=mpu&amp;amp;site=Gu ardian&amp;amp;navsection=1699&amp;amp;section=103610&amp;amp; country=rus&amp;amp;rand=1811300"&gt; &lt;img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&amp;amp;spacedesc=mpu&amp;amp;site=Gu ardian&amp;amp;navsection=1699&amp;amp;section=103610&amp;amp; country=rus&amp;amp;rand=1811300" width="300" height="250" border="0" alt="Advertisement"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

These low points since my arrival in March 2002 seem almost surreal in their stupidity and cruelty. But beneath these moments of brutality there has been a current of slow and steady change. Money is big here. People love it. Each time you attempt to craft an epithet about the Russian people, they spring up and contradict you. But all the same, it is fair to say that the poor feel jealousy towards the rich rather than ideological revulsion. There is nostalgia about Soviet times, yet, as countless people have told me, "We lived well back then, but it was a nightmare." Now, in the main, people just want a nicer life.Moscow is today less a city riven by the blacked-out BMWs and banditry of the 1990s, and more a cluster of chain stores and family saloons. Under Putin, the retail class has been born. Travel agents and restaurateurs - not professors and doctors - are the new bourgeoisie. In the 90s, capitalism was about speculation: using the wildly unjust currents of default, hyper-inflation, reckless privatisation and state corruption, a time to make your dodgy billion and perhaps leg it abroad if anyone found out. In the more stable period since 2000, only state corruption remains and the growing middle class - a fifth of the population if you are being generous, but growing rapidly, despite being vastly out-numbered by their impoverished compatriots - have made their money on an increasingly level playing field. Work and ingenuity (coupled with a little luck) equals wealth. It is an equation we in the west know well, but here it is a complete novelty and pretty damn popular.
Take Vera, a young, single mother who works in publishing. She earns about $2,000 (Ł1,075) a month in a company that pays its taxes religiously. She lives in a suburban flat, and drives to work every day in a flash black Audi which she has bought on credit.
When I asked Dmitri Peskov, the Kremlin's smoothest spokesman, what his definition of democracy was, he said: "Freedom and prosperity." It is pretty clear which part of this phrase is the most popular in Russia (and, let's face it, in the politically indifferent west too, perhaps).
The definition also exposes Russia's big problem with democracy - a word that really means "government by the people", something Russia has never had. People vote today, but the Kremlin still controls the media and the parties. In other words, it controls who can run and who wins. Before the Soviet experiment, there were the tsars, who just about got around to liberating the serfs before being plunged into war and revolution, and then being executed. About 2% of the population here has always run the remaining 98% like an extended slave-labour force. Cruelty has always loomed large in this vast society that spans Europe and Asia. And the European idea of 98% of the people choosing their ruling elite is at odds with Russia's still broadly Asian mindset.
The 90s saw an explosion of "freedom" and an absence of regulation. In Britain, for instance, freedom of speech comes with basic restraints: you can be sued if you slander someone, or jailed if you incite murder. But in the post Soviet realm, there were no such rules, or independent judiciary. High politics remained the playground of the rich and connected. State assets were dubiously privatised; the news media brimmed with the dirtiest of political allegations; some of the state's 89 regions declared themselves to be broadly autonomous; two separatist wars erupted in Chechnya.
Boris Yeltsin was a lifelong part of the communist ruling class, or nomenklatura, who extended the old elite's rule into the new, chaotic and market-led era when he became the first president of the Russian Federation in 1991. Painful, largely ineffective economic reforms and the first war with Chechnya followed before his re-election in 1996. Two years later, the rouble collapsed and Russia defaulted on its foreign debt under Yeltsin's mismanagement. As the country plunged into crisis, the doddering president began looking for someone to hand over to. The eye of the leadership cabal settled on Vladimir Putin, the relatively unknown head of the security services. First, Yeltsin appointed him prime minister, and then, when Yeltsin resigned on New Year's Eve in 1999, he named him as acting president. In March 2000, Putin's presidency was confirmed in national elections. To those in power around Yeltsin, Putin had seemed a grey enough former KGB agent to be harmless. Yet he became the antidote to Yeltsin, his immediate task being to impose some sort of regulation - the Russian word is poryadok, or order - on a state that was rapidly falling apart.
I do not believe that anyone could have repaired the Russia of 1999 with just a little tender loving care. Aside from the currency's collapse, Chechen separatists were mounting incursions into Russia; apartment blocks were mysteriously being blown up in the capital city; the president was perhaps more dangerous when he was sober than when he was drunk. Putin came in and, with the blunt brutality of a KGB hood, began fixing some things. Yeltsin disappeared; the Russian military won a second war in Chechnya, decisively if savagely; a raft of economic reforms were introduced to calm Russia down. At first, Putin ignored his electorate. While Russians were gripped in August 2000 by the tragedy of 118 crew trapped on the Barents sea bed beyond reach of rescue in the nuclear submarine Kursk, a holidaying president memorably and bluntly remarked: "It sank."
But he learned quickly, his appearances soon catering to public opinion, and his ministries becoming more open to the media (gone are the days when a spokesman tells you to send a fax with your questions and call back next week for comment). A flat income tax rate of 13% was introduced. For a while, things seemed better, until late 2003, when the Kremlin began a long campaign of shutting down its political opponents and tightening its control of the country's media and natural resources.
The Kremlin is at times remarkably stupid. Putin is by most accounts one of the most popular leaders Russia has had and easily its most popular personality today. Yet his impressive poll figures are generated in a political climate where his opponents have been put out of business, starved of TV time and seats in parliament. Putin can never know how popular he truly is, so instead paranoia sets in, the Kremlin stifling anything that could upset his dominance of the political scene. He ends up looking a little silly, rescuing Russia from chaos and collapse but then worrying whether Russians will vote to restore the communists at the next election.
An aide close to Putin once gave an excellent description of why this bizarre Soviet-esque reflex sets in. Chain-smoking, he told me: "Fifteen years ago, we lived under a different system, as if on Mars." After the collapse of communism, he said, the political elite got to grips pretty quickly with the idea that Russia needed to be a market economy, run by democracy and geared towards making people as equal as possible. "It was clear to all that's where we have to go. Then a difficult task emerges - what must be done to achieve all this? And when somebody confronts this problem in his everyday work, he finds the tools that he tries to use are mainly Soviet. Learning to use new tools - democratic ones, market ones - is not so easy. It does not happen quickly. This is the problem Putin has. The solutions are half-Soviet."
So what Russia has now is an infantile democracy built through Soviet tools, and the freedom to shop. It is better than nothing, but not enough. It takes only a moment for the fragility to show. I remember the queues at cash machines in the summer of 2004, with Russians desperate to put their savings back under the mattress after rumours spread that the authorities might withdraw licenses from some banks. Banks had proliferated across the country, but their spread had not been matched by confidence in the banking system.
The conflict between appearance and reality is similarly evident in Chechnya. Parts of its capital, Grozny, are unrecognisable today compared with the greying skeleton of a city I first saw in 2002. "Life is returning to normal," says the Kremlin, and, on the central Victory Avenue, it seems so: new pavements, new streetlights, and buildings with new, whitewashed facades. Yet behind these facades the buildings remain bombed-out ruins.
Still, despite the fact that the Chechen republic is run in a climate of fear by gangs of mercenaries loyal to different and warring pro-Moscow warlords, things look better if you look down Victory Avenue. The pro-Russian president was "elected" (albeit in a highly questionable vote). There are cranes up everywhere, erecting new (government) buildings. There is cellphone coverage.
Many fear that the facade and the work-in-progress is all they will ever get. As one Grozny resident and long-term observer of the conflict told me: "The problem is that people will begin to think that this really is normality and democracy and freedom." A similar problem pervades the rest of Putin's Russia. He has a parliament, the Duma, where two-thirds of MPs are loyal (the president has no formal party links, but has full support from the United Russia party, with its absolute majority). He has a human rights watchdog, each of whose members he appointed. He holds elections, yet regards them like a military operation to defeat the enemy, rather than a test of popular will. The institutions are there, but so far only the external wall has been created. A lot of quick work is needed to prevent the facade's collapse.
The next 18 months will decide whether the Putin administration was the beginning of a real democracy, or a Potemkin village like central Grozny. The Kremlin head faces a real dilemma. The majority of Russians tell pollsters that they want him to stay on. But to do so, he would have to change the constitution. He has repeatedly said he will not do so and his two possible successors, Sergei Ivanov and the first deputy prime minister Dmitri Medevedev, are able enough.
If he left voluntarily at the height of his powers, he would be the first Russian leader to do so, perhaps securing the epitaph of being the most enlightened leader in the country's recent history. He faces little competition for that title. Only death robbed the tsars, Lenin, Stalin and the other communists of their thrones. Mikhail Gorbachev was forced out by Yeltsin, who was in turn forced out by his ailing health. After Putin's recent performance at the G8 summit, where he hosted world leaders in his home town of St Petersburg while sarcastically goading George Bush over Iraq and Tony Blair over cash-for-peerages, his poll rating has soared to a 79% high. It will take a real patriot to step down now.
But this brings me to the real reason why I am a Putin fan: he has put Russia on a course that means it will soon no longer be his choice whether he, or perhaps his successor, stays in power. Commerce, not politics, will bring Russia round. Russians have fallen irreversibly in love with denghi - their ugly word for money - and the mobility and riches of the globalised world. Thanks to Putin, a strong enough state now exists to gradually compel them to pay taxes. The Kremlin, despite its Soviet-era idiocies, still cares hugely whether it is popular, and hence often uses these monies to the electorate's benefit. With increasing taxation comes an increasing demand for representation, and eventually the government will fear the people, rather than the other way around.
Driving home in a taxi last week, we hit a bump in the road, causing the driver to apologise for the bad roads. I joked that the government was to blame and so, by extension, were the electorate for voting them in. The driver, munching sunflower seeds, said he hadn't voted for 30 years.
Yet all the same, roads are constantly being built and rebuilt in Moscow. If positive things are happening to the economy and infrastructure without a real democracy being in place, imagine what the government will do when it actually has to compete with genuine opponents to please the voters if it wants to retain power.
My four years here have seen an ugly surge of authoritarianism in Russia but also vast economic freedoms; a rise in Islamic extremism and a dozen major terrorist atrocities but also the death of their mastermind, Shamil Basayev; the broad repression of dissent, but also a hardened popular understanding in some corners of how a proper, civilised society should be; a winter then a summer that were minus and then plus 32C. And so it follows, on the pendulum of extremes that is society here, that while the country's direction can be intensely sad and worrying, it should, just moments later, be intensely hopeful.

WebErr
October 27th, 2006, 08:18 AM
Well, I think this is enough for understand our point of view. :)

Try to be objective in the confrontations of interest in the both sides. ;)

Be happy! :)

Ninjahedge
October 27th, 2006, 09:29 AM
WebErr...
Do you see it now?

Ninjahedge

Yes I know, continue. Who has killed them?




Did you read the article?

Who has killed who? The 117 russian hostages that were killed by the gas used by "Russian Soldiers"?

I thought that was pretty obvious.

And before I attempt to read the HUGE articles you dumped on us Web (they may or may not be good, I am not going to pass judgement on them) you may want to try to summarize or highlight some of the passages in a manner similar to some of the other people on this board to help you get the points you are stressing across.

It does not come across well sometimes in an online discussion when someone posts several very large passages, in their entirety and is sometimes seen as an attempt to bury it under a landslide of text. Just an observation there, but good to know.

I will see if I can read through all that if I have time!!! ;)

lofter1
October 27th, 2006, 09:40 AM
note to posters:

SPACING !!!

please ...

the eye tends to get lost when confronted with so much text
jammedintothewindowofthepostandthereadercan'tmake
headsortailsofwhatistryingtobesaid:cool:

Ninjahedge
October 27th, 2006, 09:49 AM
Ninjahedge (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=2714)
You are pretty good student of your press.
But know one important thing. Everyone of your popular and readble journalists have a Master. Most power Master (union of several Masters) have a Putin-envy and Putin-hate.

You credit your leader with too much fame and envy. AAMOF, most news organizations do not have much of an opinion about him at all.

Most of the stories I have read have been that they admire what he has done to help Russia out of its pit, but they also see the walls he is rebuilding around the freedoms and liberties that were awarded after the fall of the CCCP.

These walls are so good at protecting these freedoms that even the people of Russia cannot see them anymore! ;)


And your government (Rice) have a good deal with that Person(s). Russia have a rich by mineral resources and do not want to give it to your giant companies free (or with discount) and this is the way of "free" press to scream like a fishwife about "Not Democratic!", "Putin is Bloody Dictator!", "Gas is Russian Weapon!", "No Free Press!".

Wrong again. You are doing the "grand conspiracy" theory thing again and lumping everything into one giant organization that has somethnig against Russia.

1. Rice does not control Big Buisness.
2. Rice does not control the press.
3. Rice looks like a black female version of David Letterman.

Anyway, you are mixing matching and mashing everything together into something that does not resemble the reality that you are facing.


Oh, my... Just relax and open your eyes. We have good lider, make order in press and TV, make Westland pay for gas and oil (without any discount) and start living as any normal country. We happy!

And you still fail to see what we are talking about.

I hate to pull the Hitler card, but here it is (not directly comparing the man to Putin, but take a close look). Hitler brought prosperity and jobs to Germany. He was loved by so many that tehy ignored other "little" thnigs he was doing on the side. He went, little by little, to erode the freedoms of people he did not like in his country. He did this so well that noone in his nation protested enough to be heard before being silenced.

His end objective was undiniably different than whan Putin, or arguably any other Russian leader would think to do, but your leaders are using the guise of prosperity to remove freedoms from you when they are not needed to be exercised.

These "revisions" are not easily seen. Much in the same way that things like our "line item veto" and "patriot act" have silently removed bits and peices of our own freedom, yuor leader provides food to the masses while at the same time removes the dissenting sources for press and communication. What happens if/when he does somethnig wrong now? Will there be anyone in your country that will report this? Or have they been quietly delt with while you have been looking at something else?


If you want, you can read comments of simple citizens about articles in your "free" press in inosmi.ru, but warning: it will be not so pleasure as read US press.

Warning? Come on man! I can go to rush limbaughs website if I want to hear about "genuine americans" that think everything the president is doing id right. I do not think for a moment that they represent everyone, or that they know all of what is going on.

It is amazing how you keep resisting the notion that your government can do anything wrong. You have yet to admit anything you believe is not right with your leader and government which only ads to the miage that you are not telling everything OR that you are misinformed.

When you portray your side as perfect, then the other side knows you are lying.


By the way, Rice was secret agent too, but she is specialist about Russia.

What does that have to do with anything?


P.S. We are not so stupid to give free any resources (mineral or humanic), now we know true face of Democracic Ideology. We will never pay again for the words. Buy these words yourself.

What are you talking about? You are mixing subjects again.


bobrik (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=8589)
Don't worry about it. How can we explain? Forget it...

You are not explaining anything, you are blaming and accusing the other side rather than addressing the issues. Yuo are behaving a lot like Karl Rove in this and that is not tolerated well.

Although I do have to admit that you are a bit nicer than Karl... ;)


ZippyTheChimp (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/member.php?u=2463)
Where your Ex-Presidents go after their President Period? In giant corporation. Right?[/quote]


What? This shows how little you know. You look at Clinton and think that all go to some big corporate interest? I am sure that is where Carter went!

You are using blanket statements to defame the target of your criticism and the blanet simply does not cover everyone you are trying to address.

Please stop that! You are battling more idealogy rather than actual facts, truths and policies. Arguements like that are rarely ever settled because at least one of the protagonists is too closely emotionally connected to teh issue and refuses to let go of one or more of his points NOT because he has anything to prove them, but just because he FEELS for them.

That is no way to debate, although sadly it is a way to "win the hearts" of a people. :(

WebErr
October 28th, 2006, 04:37 AM
You credit your leader with too much fame and envy. AAMOF, most news organizations do not have much of an opinion about him at all.

Most of the stories I have read have been that they admire what he has done to help Russia out of its pit, but they also see the walls he is rebuilding around the freedoms and liberties that were awarded after the fall of the CCCP.

These walls are so good at protecting these freedoms that even the people of Russia cannot see them anymore! ;)

You cannot see any wall around freedom of my country except wall of law.
You can see you favorite channel in Russia too, just buy antenna and watch any US channel. If you want to write about "Bloody Regime" then you better prepare to smiling on faces of simple Russians. We are not afraid by ourself.
Temporary methods will be stay until our sick economic and politic-management systems start working good.

We will not go away from the road of democracy again, but someone try to take a bite of big Russia-Pie and protect himself Democracy Slogans in "free" press. It is possible now, but every day harder and harder to do it again. It is the reason of panic in some of your "free" press.


Wrong again. You are doing the "grand conspiracy" theory thing again and lumping everything into one giant organization that has somethnig against Russia.

1. Rice does not control Big Buisness.
2. Rice does not control the press.
3. Rice looks like a black female version of David Letterman.

Anyway, you are mixing matching and mashing everything together into something that does not resemble the reality that you are facing.

I did not said something about Rice control something. She is main specialist and adviser about Russia in your Government. Your Government have a good deal with giant corporations like Shell and BP, and Big Men who control corporations, have an influence on your "free" press.
Iraq is the to hard way to control oil, but Russia... Someone like Yeltsyn again and they shell do it. (Shell do it! ;))


And you still fail to see what we are talking about.

I hate to pull the Hitler card, but here it is (not directly comparing the man to Putin, but take a close look). Hitler brought prosperity and jobs to Germany. He was loved by so many that tehy ignored other "little" thnigs he was doing on the side. He went, little by little, to erode the freedoms of people he did not like in his country. He did this so well that noone in his nation protested enough to be heard before being silenced.

His end objective was undiniably different than whan Putin, or arguably any other Russian leader would think to do, but your leaders are using the guise of prosperity to remove freedoms from you when they are not needed to be exercised.

These "revisions" are not easily seen. Much in the same way that things like our "line item veto" and "patriot act" have silently removed bits and peices of our own freedom, yuor leader provides food to the masses while at the same time removes the dissenting sources for press and communication. What happens if/when he does somethnig wrong now? Will there be anyone in your country that will report this? Or have they been quietly delt with while you have been looking at something else?:(

Well, another one, who compare Russian lider with Hitler.
Please, do not do it again if you want to speak with me.
Our grandfathers was killed in the War. We safe the world not for your comparison our liders with Hitler. Not Lenin, Not Putin.


Warning? Come on man! I can go to rush limbaughs website if I want to hear about "genuine americans" that think everything the president is doing id right. I do not think for a moment that they represent everyone, or that they know all of what is going on.

It is amazing how you keep resisting the notion that your government can do anything wrong. You have yet to admit anything you believe is not right with your leader and government which only ads to the miage that you are not telling everything OR that you are misinformed.

When you portray your side as perfect, then the other side knows you are lying.

You are well informed, man. :D I listening you and see my Motherland as Big Bear Lair, there living Gray People under the propaganda every time. Someone driving across People Stream and yell loud-speaker "Putin is Good, Putin is God." Oh... my poor misinformed Russians... we shell do Democracy on your heads!..:D

I think you better to read our comments with comment on your forums. It will be better comparison then between Hitler and Russian lider.

By the way: Georgia is a country too...:D


What does that have to do with anything?

About "Bloody Agent Rice" we will never write until "free" press will come to our country too.


What are you talking about? You are mixing subjects again.

No, I just telling you about payment of my country for democracy.
For your Westland Governments it is a commodity for sale.


You are not explaining anything, you are blaming and accusing the other side rather than addressing the issues. Yuo are behaving a lot like Karl Rove in this and that is not tolerated well.

Although I do have to admit that you are a bit nicer than Karl... ;)



I did not ever listen about Karl Rove. Please, tell some more understandable.


What? This shows how little you know. You look at Clinton and think that all go to some big corporate interest? I am sure that is where Carter went!

You are using blanket statements to defame the target of your criticism and the blanet simply does not cover everyone you are trying to address.

Please stop that! You are battling more idealogy rather than actual facts, truths and policies. Arguements like that are rarely ever settled because at least one of the protagonists is too closely emotionally connected to teh issue and refuses to let go of one or more of his points NOT because he has anything to prove them, but just because he FEELS for them.

That is no way to debate, although sadly it is a way to "win the hearts" of a people. :(

Well, you don't like it? Mixing facts without logic? It is the way of your press: "Something here, something there, some sansations in here... well, now adding scandal, adding some of propaganda (I need to feed) and it's done. Eat that, my dear readers." It is unreasonable to have this kind of press and talk about "Our Free Press". I read your press enough for understand, listen, in CCCP press was more free and fair. Really.
Now you trying to plant your "free press" to country where people got used to believe to newspapers. I am not confront with freedom, but I will always confront lie in the press!
And I don't want to win something more then your understanding.

lofter1
October 28th, 2006, 08:47 AM
Last night Charlie Rose (http://www.charlierose.com/) interviewed one of the attorneys representing Mikhail Khodorkovsky (http://www.mbktrial.com/about/) regarding the business atmosphere / corruption at the highest levels in Russia as it pertains to the Yukos Case (http://www.mbktrial.com/about/yukos3.cfm) (wherein the Kremlin took over a private gas company under the guise of Tax Evasion Charges and has arrested (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3213505.stm), convicted (http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2005/10/wake-up-call-khodorkovsky-and-rule-of.php), and sent Khodorkovsky (http://www.mbktrial.com/about/mbk_bio.cfm) (as an executive of Yukos Oil Company and one of the first Russian entrepeneurs to insist on transparency in financial transactions in Russia) to prison at Krasnokamensk Penal Colony IK-10, a former Gugag near Mongolia (http://www.mbktrial.com/developments/prisons.cfm)).

The attorney interviewed by Rose was Robert Amsterdam (http://Robert Amsterdam.com/R).

More on Mikhail Khodorkovsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Khodorkovsky) from wikipedia.

ECHR President Confirms Priority Status for Mikhail Khodorkovky’s Complaint

October 26, 2006

Luzius Wildhaber, President of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), said today he believes the ECHR provision allowing for certain cases to be given priority status not discriminatory.

Wildhaber also confirmed that Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s complaint to the European Court of Human Rights has been given priority status, although he refused to elaborate further.

The announcement comes three years and one day after Mikhail Khodorkovsky was first arrested in 2003.

Read more Recent Developments » (http://www.mbktrial.com/developments/index.cfm)

A comment from a blogger (http://www.blogger.com/profile/21567357):

What's important to remember is that most of the people who put money into Russia now are not thinking of Russia as an investment but rather as a Casino where they can drop their extra cash and just see what happens. When a country has that kind of reputation, its fundamentals are destroyed and oblivion is not far off. But then, this has always been the case in Russia.
Russia Ranked Alongside Swaziland in Level of Corruption

Posted by Bob Amsterdam
September 19, 2006 6:34 PM

If anyone had any doubts about whether the Yukos case was a one-off in Russia, they ought to read this new report by the World Bank (http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:21055723~menuPK:51062075~pagePK:3437 0~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html).

The September 2006 report, entitled, “Governance Matters” ranked Russia 151st among 208 countries in terms of political stability, democratic voice and accountability, effectiveness of government, quality of regulatory bodies, rule of law and control over corruption. Overall that placed Russia in the league of Swaziland and Zambia, and just ahead of East Timor. Russia’s political stability – defined as the perceived likelihood that the government will be destabilized or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means – was comparable to that of the Philippines and Kyrgyzstan. On the credibility of the state's commitment to policy formation and implementation, Russia was in a group with Pakistan and Tanzania. For regulatory quality, Russia was ranked alongside Madagascar and Senegal. Rule of law in Russia was as effective as in Ecuador, Indonesia and Bangladesh.

With company like that, one would hope that greater caution would be exercised as the EU and Russia continue their negotiations for a partnership treaty – yet the message still doesn’t get through. This World Bank report, as well as the latest news from the Sakhalin project, underscore what I have been arguing for some time: that corrupt elements in the Russian leadership have not only abused the law and seized private property as it suits them, but have also parlayed the resulting oil and gas wealth into political and economic influence on the world stage, bullying their neighbors and enriching themselves in the process.

Make no mistake, Russia has imperial ambitions, and in order to curb them and turn Russia into an equal partner, the West has got to stop showing such weak-kneed deference to the energy weapon.

YUKOS Revenues vs. Tax Charges

From 2000 to 2003, YUKOS Oil brought in revenues of approximately US $46.1 billion. Despite paying taxes above or at the industry average and being audited annually by independent international auditing firms, Russian tax officials charged YUKOS with widespread tax evasion and fraud for operations in 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. Beginning in June 2003 and lasting until late 2004, YUKOS was hit with a succession of tax bills, the total burden amounting to a staggering $42.2 billion. The tax charges approached the company’s total revenue even before expenses, and were, in fact, higher than its revenue during 2001 and 2002.

View the revenue vs. tax chart » (http://www.mbktrial.com/about/yukos_taxes.cfm)

MrSpice
October 28th, 2006, 01:04 PM
You cannot see any wall around freedom of my country except wall of law.
You can see you favorite channel in Russia too, just buy antenna and watch any US channel. If you want to write about "Bloody Regime" then you better prepare to smiling on faces of simple Russians. We are not afraid by ourself. It is possible now, but every day harder and harder to do it again. It is the reason of panic in some of your "free" press.



I did not said something about Rice control something. She is main specialist and adviser about Russia in your Government. Your Government have a good deal with giant corporations like Shell and BP, and Big Men who control corporations, have an influence on your "free" press.
Iraq is the to hard way to control oil

I think you better to read our comments with comment on your forums. It will be better comparison then between Hitler and Russian lider.

About "Bloody Agent Rice" we will never write until "free" press will come to our country too.

Well, you don't like it? Mixing facts without logic? It is the way of your press: "Something here, something there, some sansations in here... well, now adding scandal, adding some of propaganda (I need to feed) and it's done. Eat that, my dear readers." It is unreasonable to have this kind of press and talk about "Our Free Press". I read your press enough for understand, listen, in CCCP press was more free and fair. Really.
Now you trying to plant your "free press" to country where people got used to believe to newspapers. I am not confront with freedom, but I will always confront lie in the press!
And I don't want to win something more then your understanding.

Unlike most people on this forum I can read in Russian and read some russian newspapers. I lived in Russia and visited Russia recently. I can say that what you're desperately trying to do is to disparage the United States and imply that Russia is a great and free country, whereas in the US, there's nothing but corruption, big business that controls everything and press is similar to what you saw in the Soviet Union.

All of that is total crap, pardon my French. If you feel that newspapers here in the US are unfree and lie, please give some specific quotes from one of the established US newspapers like New York Times or Wahsingont Post. You were told several times to give specific examples before you critisize, but you just like to ramble on with your fantasies.

There's no doubt that in the US the big business has influence on politics. However, the press is another matter. A typical New York Times journalist lives a normal middle-class life and takes subway train to work and does not get any kind of payouts from corporations. I read New York Times virtually every day. I find it to be a very good and fair newspapers.

It is really strange that you would choose to talk about corrpution and the influence of big business in the US where Russia is one of the most corrupt countries on the face of the earth. It's the country where the vast majority of population lives in poverty, where a small portion of population - mostly in Moscow and other large cities - eat at suhi bars and build expensive mansions for themselves. Russia is corrupt to the core. Russian police is known for dishonosty and corruption. Yes, Russians can get US channels on satellite. But very few have that options, and very few speak English. And all of Russian TV is under gorvenment's control. I watch your TV - it's a kiss-ass TV for your tsar Mr. Putin. Comparing US newspapers to the ones we read in the Soviet times is simply ridiculous. You know nothing about the United States and you're seirously biased against this country.

lofter1
October 29th, 2006, 08:42 AM
This one could be entitled "Why I Hate What We've Become" ...

Businesses Seek Protection on Legal Front

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/10/29/business/29corporate.600.jpg
Left to right: Stephen Hilger/Bloomberg News; Hiroko Masuike for The New York Times; Adam Berry/Bloomberg News;
David McIntyre/Bloomberg News; and Mychele Daniau/Agence France-Presse-Getty Images
Leading the groups hoping to scale back regulation are, left to right, R. Glenn Hubbard,
dean of Columbia Business School, John L. Thornton, a former president of Goldman Sachs,
Robert Glauber, a former NASD chairman, Donald Evans, a former commerce secretary,
and Samuel DiPiazza, chief executive of PricewaterhouseCoopers.

nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/business/29corporate.html?hp&ex=1162184400&en=9358599aad440557&ei=5094&partner=homepage)
By STEPHEN LABATON
October 29, 2006

WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 — Frustrated with laws and regulations that have made companies and accounting firms more open to lawsuits from investors and the government, corporate America — with the encouragement of the Bush administration — is preparing to fight back.

Now that corruption cases like Enron and WorldCom are falling out of the news, two influential industry groups with close ties to administration officials are hoping to swing the regulatory pendulum in the opposite direction. The groups are drafting proposals to provide broad new protections to corporations and accounting firms from criminal cases brought by federal and state prosecutors as well as a stronger shield against civil lawsuits from investors.

Although the details are still being worked out, the groups’ proposals aim to limit the liability of accounting firms for the work they do on behalf of clients, to force prosecutors to target individual wrongdoers rather than entire companies, and to scale back shareholder lawsuits.

The groups hope to reduce what they see as some burdens imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, landmark post-Enron legislation adopted in 2002. The law, which placed significant new auditing and governance requirements on companies, gave broad discretion for interpretation to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The groups are also interested in rolling back rules and policies that have been on the books for decades.

To alleviate concerns that the new Congress may not adopt the proposals — regardless of which party holds power in the legislative branch next year — many are being tailored so that they could be adopted through rulemaking by the S.E.C. and enforcement policy changes at the Justice Department.

The proposals will begin to be laid out in public shortly after Election Day, members of the groups said in recent interviews. One of the committees was formed by the United States Chamber of Commerce and until recently was headed by Robert K. Steel.

Mr. Steel was sworn in last Friday as the new Treasury undersecretary for domestic finance, and he is the senior official in the department who will be formulating the Treasury’s views on the issues being studied by the two groups.

The second committee was formed by the Harvard Law professor Hal S. Scott, along with R. Glenn Hubbard, a former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers for President Bush, and John L. Thornton, a former president of Goldman Sachs, where he worked with Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.

That group has colloquially become known around Washington as the Paulson Committee because the relatively new Treasury secretary issued an encouraging statement when it was formed last month. But administration officials said Friday that he was not playing a role in the group’s deliberations.

Its members include Donald L. Evans, a former commerce secretary who remains a close friend of President Bush; Samuel A. DiPiazza Jr., chief executive of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accounting giant; Robert R. Glauber, former chairman and chief executive of the National Association of Securities Dealers, the private group that oversees the securities industry; and the chief executives of DuPont, Office Depot and the CIT Group.

Jennifer Zuccarelli, a spokeswoman at the Treasury Department, said on Friday that no decision had been made about which recommendations would be supported by the administration.

“While the department always wants to hear new ideas from academic and industry thought leaders, especially to encourage the strength of the U.S. capital markets, Treasury is not a member of these committees and is not collaborating on any findings,” Ms. Zuccarelli said.

But another official and committee members noted that Mr. Paulson had recently pressed the groups in private discussions to complete their work so it could be rolled out quickly after the November elections.

Moreover, committee members say that they expect many of their recommendations will be used as part of an overall administration effort to limit what they see as overzealous state prosecutions by such figures as the New York State attorney general Elliot Spitzer and abusive class action lawsuits by investors. The groups will also attempt to lower what they see as the excessive costs associated with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Their critics, however, see the effort as part of a plan to cater to the most well-heeled constituents of the administration and insulate politically connected companies from prosecution at the expense of investors.

One consideration in drafting the proposals has been the chain of events at Arthur Andersen, the accounting firm that was convicted in 2002 of obstruction of justice for shredding Enron-related documents; the conviction was overturned in 2005 by the Supreme Court. The proposals being drafted would aim to limit the liability of auditing firms and include a policy shift to make it harder for prosecutors to bring cases against individuals and companies.

Even though Arthur Andersen played a prominent role in various corporate scandals, some business and legal experts have criticized the decision by the Bush administration to bring a criminal case that had the effect of shutting the firm down.

The proposed policies would emphasize the prosecution of culpable individuals rather than corporations and auditing firms. That shift could prove difficult for prosecutors because it is often harder to find sufficient evidence to show that specific people at a company were the ones who knowingly violated a law.

One proposal would recommend that the Justice Department sharply curtail its policy of forcing companies under investigation to withhold paying the legal fees of executives suspected of violating the law. Another one would require some investor lawsuits to be handled by arbitration panels, which are traditionally friendlier to defendants.

In an interview last week with Bloomberg News, Mr. Paulson repeated his criticism of the Sarbanes-Oxley law. While it had done some good, he said, it had contributed to “an atmosphere that has made it more burdensome for companies to operate.”

Mr. Paulson also repeated a line from his first speech, given at Columbia Business School last August, where he said, “Often the pendulum swings too far and we need to go through a period of readjustment.”

Some experts see Mr. Paulson’s complaint as a step backward.

“This is an escalation of the culture war against regulation,” said James D. Cox, a securities and corporate law professor at Duke Law School. He said many of the proposals, if adopted, “would be a dark day for investors.”

Professor Cox, who has studied 600 class action lawsuits over the last decade, said it was difficult to find “abusive or malicious” cases, particularly in light of new laws and court decisions that had made it more difficult to file such suits.

The number of securities class action lawsuits has dropped substantially in each of the last two years, he noted, arguing that the impact of the proposals from the business groups would be that “very few people would be prosecuted.”

People involved in the committees said that the timing of the proposals was being dictated by the political calendar: closely following Election Day and as far away as possible from the 2008 elections.

Mr. Hubbard, who is now dean of Columbia Business School, said the committee he helps lead would focus on the lack of proper economic foundation for a number of regulations. Most changes will be proposed through regulation, he said, because “the current political environment is simply not ripe for legislation.”

But the politics of changing the rules do not break cleanly along party lines. While some prominent Democrats would surely attack the pro-business efforts, there are others who in the past have been sympathetic.

People involved in the committees’ work said that their objective was to improve the attractiveness of American capital-raising markets by scaling back rules whose costs outweigh their benefits.

“We think the legal liability issues are the most serious ones,” said Professor Scott, the director of the committee singled out by Mr. Paulson. “Companies don’t want to use our markets because of what they see as the substantial, and in their view excessive, liability.”

Committee officials disputed the notion that they were simply catering to powerful business interests seeking to benefit from loosening regulations that could wind up hurting investors.

“It’s unfortunate to the extent that this has been politicized,” said Robert E. Litan, a former Justice Department official and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who is overseeing the committee’s legal liability subgroup. “The objectives are clearly not to gut such reforms as Sarbanes-Oxley. I’m for cost-effective regulation.”

The main Sarbanes-Oxley provision that both committees are focusing on is a part that is commonly called Section 404, which requires audits of companies’ internal financial controls. Some business experts praise this section as having made companies more transparent and better managed, but many smaller companies call the section too costly and unnecessary.

Members of the two committees said that they had reached a consensus that Section 404, along with greater threat of investor lawsuits and government prosecutions, had discouraged foreign companies from issuing new stock on exchanges in the United States in recent months.

The committee members said that an increase in stock offerings abroad was evidence that the American liability system and tougher auditing standards were taking a toll on the competitiveness of American markets. But others see different reasons for the trend and few links to liability and accounting rules.

Bill Daley, a former commerce secretary in the Clinton administration who is the co-chairman of the Chamber of Commerce group, expects proposed changes to liability standards for accounting firms and corporations to draw the most flak. But he said that the changes affecting accounting firms are of paramount importance to prevent the further decline in competition. Only four major firms were left after Andersen’s collapse.

Another contentious issue concerns a proposal to eliminate the use of a broadly written and long-established anti-fraud rule, known as Rule 10b-5, that allows shareholders to sue companies for fraud. The change could be accomplished by a vote of the S.E.C.

John C. Coffee, a professor of securities law at Columbia Law School and an adviser to the Paulson Committee, said that he had recommended that the S.E.C. adopt the exception to Rule 10b-5 so that only the commission could bring such lawsuits against corporations.

But other securities law experts warned that such a move would extinguish a fundamental check on corporate malfeasance.

“It would be a shocking turning back to say only the commission can bring fraud cases,” said Harvey J. Goldschmid, a former S.E.C. commissioner and law professor at Columbia University. “Private enforcement is a necessary supplement to the work that the S.E.C. does. It is also a safety valve against the potential capture of the agency by industry.”

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

ZippyTheChimp
October 29th, 2006, 09:34 AM
^
The thread topic is fractured enough without further dilution. I think you could have found a better place for this.

Ninjahedge
October 30th, 2006, 09:24 AM
Web, you have avoided every point I have brought to you and refuse to site examples of the things you are stating.

When I compared certain things between Russia and Germany, they were spot on. I was not bringing ANYTHING about what happened later, but warned you about the removal of freedoms when things seem to be getting better.

But no, you decide to go "I will not listen if you talk about him". I told you it was not a direct comparison to the individual, but to the policy. Read up on modern history through the net and you might get a more balanced look at things than what you currently have through your own sources.


You have been belligerent, obstinate, and insulting. I say that you never admit any wrong by your country, and you mock me for saying it WITHOUT BRINGING ANYTHING TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THINGS YOU DO NOT LIKE ABOUT YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT!

If you are not one dancing in the street saying "my leader is God, my country is great!!" the PROVE it rather than decry it while at the same time denouncing your critics and not bringing any proof to the table.

The thing that really annoys me is that you came to a rather free-spoken well informed civil board to spread your own self-victimization. "Why you hate us?" is an oxymoronic question in that NOONE ON THIS SITE HATED THE RUSSIANS, but you are getting some of the people here to hate you and your friends in particular.

If your post was indeed meant to get a better understanding of the American people and try to balance both sides views on this matter, please continue. But if you are only looking for some sort of self-righteous misinformed "justice" please take it somewhere else where you can yell at a bunch of people that will have no problem yelling back at you and not waste any time trying to get you to read a bit more about the world OUTSIDE of your rose-colored shell.

incognito
October 30th, 2006, 02:59 PM
First this to say is that I agree with the point that WebErr and few others tend to speak but don't listen or discuss, thus making it look like propaganda statements and accusations. Like I said before, I am able to take the stand in favor of any of the sides now that I have had a lot of personal experience on both sides of the ocean. So let me answer some issues mentioned in the latest messages.


When I compared certain things between Russia and Germany, they were spot on. I was not bringing ANYTHINg about what happened later, but warned you about the removal of freedoms when things seem to be getting better.

But no, you decide to go "I will not listen if you talk about him". I told you it was not a direct comparison to teh individual, but to the policy. Read up on modern history through the net and you might get a more balanced look at things than what you currently have through your own sources.
I this case I'd rather agree with WebErr. Whatever reasons you had bringing this up, or how many times you told that it's not direct comparison, it's still a comparison that takes up on a highly sensitive subject for any russian. I guess that's one of those things where we differ, one of those cultural differences. Nearly every family had lost a relative in that war. I lost a grandfather, and my father was under german occupation for three years. If you are to make a comparison, please think of a different example.

I am actually much more critical of russian press than WebErr. I find it mostly uninteresting for a smart individual. Also it is plagued by bad translations from foreign sources that often change the meaning 360 degrees. US press is more professional, and more forward in what it prints, Yet, in my opinion, both the press and TV channels here in the US would rather play the tune they think people expect to hear than tell the story the way they truly feel as educated journalists who have seen the world and know much more than an average suburban mom in the middle of nowhere. We all know that truth can have many faces, and the presentation is highly important. Otherwise we can call Michael Moore's docudramas a complete truth, which I my opinion is not.

The trouble with Russia is a history of corruption on all levels - that's what I'd rather agree with. On one hand it's no different than in many other countries in that most of things are driven by connections rather than by true market. This happens in the US as well but mostly on higher levels. You can see the scandals here and there from time to time. On the other hand, in Russia the magnitude of that is much higher. My parents can't think of not "thanking" a doctor in every hospital they'd been in the last few years (a lot), as they're afraid that otherwise the doctors would not pay as much attention to them. As the condition of patients is not electronically monitored there, it's often a matter of minutes between life and death, close attention and ignorance.

I my opinion a lot of things happen in Russia due to immature state of the law system. Too many situations are not covered by law or regulations leaving it up to those in power. That is a way of control, a short leash so to say, and as such they have no incentive to correct that as quick as possible. I hate that. I hate what happened to Khodorkovsky the way it happened. I my opinion many existing laws were broken in the process. It's also customary to not follow the law in many other cases, such as, for example drinking in public places. People, including teenagers drink beer everywhere disregarding the law and comforted by police not paying attention.

I am quite comfortable living in Russia, don't take me wrong. I'm still at home there. It has become a much better and more stable place in the last several years. Yet there is still a lot to be desired.

I'm afraid I've lost the point of this discussion now. We're jumping from subject to subject without stopping, making statements wiithout confirmation or substantiation, and leaving no time or space to actually discuss anything.

Ninjahedge
October 30th, 2006, 03:13 PM
Thanks for showing a bit more balance there incognito.

And I do know that people are sensitive about the Hitler comparison, but I think both of our countries need to keep him, and his history, in mind when we watch our own governments development.

His men were brilliant, and very cunning. They knew how to manipulate people, get their support on many common issues, and then carefully prune out the dissenters through covert actions and administrative/legislative alterations.

It did not happen overnight, as it seems to many of us that did not live through it. It took many years of lifting the Germans out of a depression for them to unknowingly, or with very little resistance, relinquish their own civil liberties.

Any otehr comparison is difficult to make in modern times because there really has not bean any leading industrial nation that has had its rights stripped without any overthrow or revolution. I am not familiar enough with Italian politics at the time, so I can't say what happened with men like Mousolinni (spelling). I also know that Russia had a different progression of corruption after its revolution that does not compare to what is happening now.


The only caution I make is that we need to be aware of what our leaders are doing, and not just from them and their sources telling us.

MrSpice
October 30th, 2006, 03:21 PM
Thanks for showing a bit more balance there incognito.

And I do know that people are sensitive about the Hitler comparison, but I think both of our countries need to keep him, and his history, in mind when we watch our own governments development.

His men were brilliant, and very cunning. They knew how to manipulate people, get their support on many common issues, and then carefully prune out the dissenters through covert actions and administrative/legislative alterations.

It did not happen overnight, as it seems to many of us that did not live through it. It took many years of lifting the Germans out of a depression for them to unknowingly, or with very little resistance, relinquish their own civil liberties.

Any otehr comparison is difficult to make in modern times because there really has not bean any leading industrial nation that has had its rights stripped without any overthrow or revolution. I am not familiar enough with Italian politics at the time, so I can't say what happened with men like Mousolinni (spelling). I also know that Russia had a different progression of corruption after its revolution that does not compare to what is happening now.

The only caution I make is that we need to be aware of what our leaders are doing, and not just from them and their sources telling us.

There's no question that Stalin, Lenin and other leaders after them were responsible for killing millions of people. Millions more were sent to prisons and labor camps. And one of the reasons why so many people died during the Second World War is Russia was that Stalin and the communist government jailed many of the bightest and best generals. They also cut a secret deal with Hitler hoping he would not dare to attack and did not prepare. However, many Russians are still not aware of the magnitude of the atrocities that took places in the Soviet times.

WebErr
November 7th, 2006, 09:17 AM
Ninjahedge
Well, I did not fully understand you, when you start compare Putin politics to Hitler politics. I think it is very dangerous way, when you recall the word "Hitler" in the speaking with someone from CCCP. It recall too many deaths too. To much grandfathers died. Sorry again, man.

MrSpice
I think you just stay away from your newspapers... :)
Your only hope is Jeferson phrase... remember... it is not joke!.. ;)
Always try to stay objective, oposite to yourself and be free... :)

lofter1
I already read that. Nothing special. Somethere I had read something similar...

incognito
Thank you, man. Your knowledge in English language is more then just knowledge. You really help me. We are NOT what they see in Newspapers. We are. Now our Motherland feel much better. This is the main.

2 all
P.S. If you need to sing mantrahs about "Weak Russia" or something like "Russia like Zimbabue" you can do it. If it is your way, do it.
Bye.

WebErr
November 8th, 2006, 06:28 AM
My apologizes, it's me again, but THIS must be placed here!
(http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HJ31Ag01.html)
__________________________________________________ __

Central Asia

Oct 31, 2006

http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/spacer15.gif http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/spacer15.gif SPEAKING FREELY
Sticking it up Vladimir the Impaler
By Nicolai N Petro

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here (http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/write-for-atol.html) if you are interested in contributing.

Among Russian President Vladimir Putin's many sins, surely the most outrageous is that he dares to compare Russia to the West. He has clearly forgotten Russia's proper role in our Narrative of Western Civilization: to serve as a poignant example of all the

[/URL][URL]http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adview.php?what=zone:117&n=a923457d (http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adclick.php?n=a923457d)

sins that we never commit. Putin has the temerity to suggest that Russia and the West face similar problems, and the gall to think that the West could even learn a thing or two from Russia.

Quite understandably the US media have responded to such insolence with a collective "ecrasez l'infame!" After the Group of Eight summit on July 19, the venerable Times of London politely http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/images/impaled.gif told Putin that we Westerners didn't appreciate his wisecracks about the scandals surrounding Lord Levy (Prime Minister Tony Blair's chief fundraiser, dubbed "Lord Cashpoint") or democracy in Iraq. "A little more grace, and less hubris," if you please, wrote The Times.

Hear, hear! The last thing any of us needs is to hear about corruption, criminality, and violence in our own countries. Why, the next thing you know Putin will discover racism in some benighted corner of our enlightened lands and start quoting Samuel Johnson at Americans: "How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?"

The Times editorial quite properly pointed out that, as host at the G8, it was quite ungracious of Putin to give voice to such piffle. As every civilized person knows, the mark of true gentility is to attack your guest at a private dinner in his honor, as the president of the European Parliament, Josep Borrell, did at recent the EU-Russia summit in Lahti, Finland.

According the Italian daily La Stampa, Borrell introduced his guest by sarcastically remarking that "we should be thanking Putin for closing the pipelines to Ukraine last January, which has brought us here to talk about energy". From there he spoke movingly of his concern for human rights, non-governmental organizations and the free press (only in Russia, of course). "We buy oil from the worst countries," he added sadly, "but we don't ask them to share our values."

What subtlety! What grace! What a coincidence that his remarks at an event closed to the press were leaked in time for the morning editions.

Putin, though, has still not learned to sit quietly and bow his head in shame. First, he slyly admitted that he too was concerned about crime, but then added that surely Russia wasn't the only country that had such problems. What about the recent criminal indictments of several Spanish mayors, and oh, by the way, "The mafia was not born in Russia."

One could have heard a fork drop on the fine linen tablecloth. The 25 European Union leaders who had gathered to gang up on the Russian president that evening could scarcely believe their ears. Once again Putin had violated one of the cardinal principles of our relations with Russia by comparing his problems to ours.

The danger in such behavior should be apparent to all. If Russia's problems are seen as in any sense comparable to our own, then it can no longer be excluded from Western institutions on the basis of its cultural incompatibility, and what else is really left?

Militarily, as everyone knows, Russia is but a shadow of the former Soviet Union. It poses so little threat that when Georgia seized four Russian military officers, the Russian parliament responded by speeding up the withdrawal of its remaining forces. Georgian Minister of Defense Irakli Okruashvili now regularly dares Russia to try to invade his country.

Economically Russia has done better, but its foreign investments overseas still put it on a par with Malaysia. As an energy provider, Russia supplies Europe with about a quarter of its natural gas, but this is two-thirds of Russia's gas exports, so that actually Russia is far more dependent on its European consumers than they are on it.

Putin's wily retorts pose a real and present danger to the West, however, precisely because they erode the sharp distinction between Western and Russian identity, between Western and Russian values, that are needed to safeguard Western Unity.

If this distinction disappears, pray tell, how will we be able to sustain our fear of Russia? If Russia's domestic debates are likened to our own, or if the Western press should begin reporting about all the areas of cultural, economic and political similarities that already exist between Russia and the West, I ask you, how will we preserve a proper sense of Russia's fundamental alienness?

Will we still be able to distinguish clearly between the perfectly tolerable levels of corruption, intolerance, and violence in the West and the totally intolerable levels of the same in Russia? In Russia's reflection, might not our own domestic and foreign policies soon begin appear less than ideal?

This is a very slippery slope. Ultimately, such thinking could lead to questions about whether "Western values" are truly the best for all nations at all times. The faint-hearted among us might even be drawn to consider the possibility of cross-cultural dialogue about the meaning and political usefulness of such terms as "democracy" and "human rights".

Down this treacherous path one can envisage multilateral initiatives, based on more culturally inclusive definitions of democracy, taking the place of the tried and true strategies of "regime change" and "democratic-values education" promoted by the administration of US President George W Bush. Perish the thought!

That is why it is of such vital importance that Putin's uppity attitude be firmly swatted down at every opportunity and why I, for one, applaud the Western media for their diligence in this regard. The alternatives are simply too awful to contemplate.

Nicolai N Petro served as the US State Department's special assistant for policy on the Soviet Union under president George H W Bush, and now teaches international politics at the University of Rhode Island.

(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:openWindow%28%27http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/content-form.html%27,%27list%27,%27resizable=yes,scrollbar s,width=260,height=370%27%29;) and republishing (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:openWindow%28%27http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/repub-form.html%27,%27list%27,%27resizable=yes,scrollbar s,width=260,height=370%27%29;).)

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here (http://www.atimes.com/mediakit/write-for-atol.html) if you are interested in contributing.

WebErr
November 13th, 2006, 10:37 AM
I feel the wind of change in your press!
What happens? Is it result of your envoicement? Or may be someone wise and strong hear my voice?
What reason change your press?
I am very interested to know 'why'!
And interested to know 'when it will end'...

And please, return this arcticle back in that place, where I create it. :)

Proshopper
November 20th, 2006, 04:47 AM
Just a small comment, sorry to interfere: I hate the cheap,hungry, loose Russian women who are all over the world to destroy millions of decent families in their unscrupuous greed.(conservative expression):mad:

ZippyTheChimp
November 29th, 2006, 07:54 PM
What became of WebErr?

Should we get a Geiger Counter?

Ninjahedge
November 30th, 2006, 10:15 AM
He is probably busy disposing of all the leftover polonium....... ;)

WebErr
December 1st, 2006, 10:16 AM
Too many victims.
Too hard to believe.
But Russian government dont want a new the killing scandals in Western Press.

Who?! I cant suppose any logic...

It can be mafia vs mafia. I have not any another idea.


P.S. Putin kill me!.. I eat pie with poison and now I dying... Help mee...eh..khe...:p

WebErr
December 1st, 2006, 11:36 AM
How many Players can you see in this Great Game?
Try to continue this list:
- Putin and Co
- Abramovich and Co
- Berezovsky and Co
- Russian Nationalists
- Post-KGB Officers
- UK Government
- US Government
- Russian Mafia
- Poland Government
- Latvia Government
- Iran Government
- Islam Fundamentalists
- Western Press :D
... to infinity...

We will never clearly know the Truth. Real Truth - not that sh..t in your press. You see it again: press writing "Putin kill Litvinenko" and everyone read that sh..t. Someone believe in this without any proofs. My God! Unbelievable! Do not read your press! :D

Now we must waiting for "new sensations"...

WebErr
December 1st, 2006, 12:15 PM
UK Secret Forces may mark Litvinenko by Polonium. It is usually use for easy tracing the target person. But they can to do some wrong...

US CIA and Russian FSB may do similar mistake.

Some Russian Nationalists could kill him, but they using another methods.

It may be Iran Special Forces. Iran need divert Western World from their nuclear program. ( Nuclear ! ! ! )

Is also may be Islam Fundamentalists, but they using another methods. ;)

May be is was a Russian Mafia, who buy the immovables in London. (!!!)

Anyway Litvinenko may be killed without using of Plutonium. It may be mark for seeking of Secret Forces.

It may be Litva or Poland. They need Russia loose positions in Western World.

It also may be someone, who need a Pre- Cold War situation. It ma be some Senator in your Parlament. ;)

It may be some Western Press Secret Forces...:D

Try to continue...
Too many variants...

lofter1
December 1st, 2006, 12:22 PM
Too many variants...

A relief to see you didn't also list Mossad (http://www.mossad.gov.il/Mohr/MohrTopNav/MohrEnglish/MohrAboutUs/) ...

WebErr
December 1st, 2006, 12:39 PM
Mossad can kill Litvinenko if he maked transport nuclear resources from Russia to Iran. They are really professionals! I agree.

Ninjahedge
December 1st, 2006, 01:22 PM
How many Players can you see in this Great Game?
Try to continue this list:
- Putin and Co
- Abramovich and Co
- Berezovsky and Co
- Russian Nationalists
- Post-KGB Officers
- UK Government
- US Government
- Russian Mafia
- Poland Government
- Latvia Government
- Iran Government
- Islam Fundamentalists
- Western Press :D
... to infinity...

We will never clearly know the Truth. Real Truth - not that sh..t in your press. You see it again: press writing "Putin kill Litvinenko" and everyone read that sh..t. Someone believe in this without any proofs. My God! Unbelievable! Do not read your press! :D

Now we must waiting for "new sensations"...

Um, you were fine until you started catcalling the Press again. The fact that they question a mans motives when several of his critics fall dead of obvious malevolent events does not make it "sh.t.".

Instead of yelling at those that are raising the questions, try raising some yourself. Liek your ideas on who might be doing this and why. Take your list there and site references for each suspect, motivations, means and methods. What would they have to gain, what would tehy have to lose.

Just get rid of this STEREOTYPICAL HATRED OF WESTERN PRESS that you keep displaying at almost every opportunity and we will get along just fine! ;)

WebErr
December 4th, 2006, 11:59 AM
Eat some Polonium 210 before reading Western Press! :D

P.S. I dont need to be "fine" and looking good and lie. I want just a bit of justice in your /..\ press!

P.S.2. Mega-Super-Puper-Uber Press with the best journalists... of course!:D

Ninjahedge
December 4th, 2006, 02:01 PM
Eat some Polonium 210 before reading Western Press! :D

Not creative or funny. DO you have any commentary beyond "You stink" and other such astute observations?


P.S. I dont need to be "fine" and looking good and lie. I want just a bit of justice in your /..\ press!

Your meaning is lost. It is best, when you do not know the language, to try and avoide satire and sarcasm as the meaning will not be conveyed that you intend. It seems liek you are trying to insult western press, again, and somehow put yourself above it.

But all that comes out is a garbled response that adds nothing to the discussion besides distraction.


P.S.2. Mega-Super-Puper-Uber Press with the best journalists... of course!:D

Again. How old are you? This sounds like the rants of a 12 year old (which would ironically instill a bit of admiration for knowing the language this well at that young of an age).

If you do not have anything more to add besides this, please do not add anything. If you do not understand all that is being written, ASK! We will be happy to explain some of the more complicated areas that might not be as easily understood or translated.

Also do not assume that just because we are all westerners ourselves that we are all somehow blinded by the press and willing to support it unilaterally. Go read around the bulletin board a bit and see how we reacted to things like Fox News and the like and you may get a better handle on our own perspective.

WebErr
December 5th, 2006, 06:37 AM
Ninjahedge
Your knowledge of English is not really much better then mine. ;)
Go watch Fox Kids News now. :p

About your press, I ready to insert new part of dirty sh.t about Russia written by your press. Full of half-truth / half-false and in result you read that and believe.:D