YMix wrote:Well, if the Russians say it, it must be true.
Also:
[...] President Putin was livid in his disgust at the attacks. He said there was no justification, whatsoever, for the killing of innocent civilians [...]
.
Now the Preobrazhensky exists again.The Preobrazhensky regiment distinguished itself during the Great Northern War of 1700–1721, the Patriotic War of 1812, and the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878. The regiment was disbanded by its last commander, Colonel Alexander Kutepov (later a general) in December 1917. The body-guard of Catherine the Great, as well as the main supporter of her bloodless coup against her husband Peter III, this regiment was declared the highest in order of military precedence from 14 July 1762.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, membership was reserved to young Russian aristocrats and was considered a proof of loyalty to the government and Tsar. Among its membership was the Russian composer Modest Mussorgsky.
Russia Is Prepared to Sell Iranian Oil as Its Own
By: Pavel Felgenhauer
The Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem have flown to Moscow on the same plane this week to meet their Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, to discuss the situation in Syria and the Geneva II peace conference due later this month. Zarif also met with President Vladimir Putin to reportedly discuss an unprecedented deal to barter Iranian oil for Russian goods. Informed sources in the Russian government have confirmed that Moscow is in the process of finalizing an agreement to buy half a million barrels of Iranian crude a day, while Iran will buy Russian goods in exchange. At present, Iran exports only a million barrels a day as a result of United States and European Union sanctions aimed to curtail its nuclear program. Western-imposed banking restrictions have also severely hampered Iran’s ability to freely use its oil revenue. China is currently Iran’s biggest oil buyer, taking in some 420,000 barrels of crude a day in exchange for other goods. If the oil deal with Russia goes ahead, Iran may extend its shrunken oil exports by 50 percent and collect some $1.5 billion in extra revenue a month. This may undermine Western sanctions, which may have forced Iran to consider permanently constraining its nuclear program in the first place; while Russia may become Iran’s main oil buyer (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617).
Of course, unlike China, Korea and India, which have traditionally imported Iranian oil for domestic consumption, Russia is one of the world’s biggest oil producers and exporters. Russia does not need Iranian crude, its refineries are not designed to use it, and Russia does not have import facilities to handle Iranian crude from the Gulf—its oil ports are exclusively exporting facilities. Moreover, it is hardly feasible for Russia to offer Iran some $18 billion worth of needed goods a year to barter the oil, since Russia mostly exports oil, natural gas and metals itself. A Russia government source has explained: “The deal with Iran will not be simple barter—it will involve money—and since Russia did not undersign Western anti-Iranian sanctions, we are not obliged to wait for them to be removed.” Russia may sell the Iranian crude in the Asia-Pacific region to “increase its presence and influence in this growing market.” (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617).
Moscow has performed similar deals in the past: During the long and bloody Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, Russia was sending the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein massive amounts of weaponry and receiving large amounts of Iraqi crude in exchange. The Soviet Union did not need this crude and could not physically import it (same as Russia today), so the oil was sold to other customers, primarily India—a Cold War ally. Today, Russia may again take Iranian crude, rename it “Russian” and sell it as its own. Tehran will receive part of the proceeds in cash and part in Russian goods. This could effectively breach the US-led trade and financial blockade and make Tehran less inclined to make serious concessions on its nuclear program. The US administration has expressed concern about Russian plans to “buy Iranian crude,” but Russian foreign ministry officials told journalists: “We told the Americans it is none of their business; we may buy any amount of Iranian oil and sell Iran any goods we choose.” Russia it not breaching any mandatory United Nations sanctions by buying Iranian crude and selling Iran goods, the officials noted, while the unilateral Western oil and financial sanctions against Iran “are illegitimate” (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617).
Furthermore, Moscow is insisting that Tehran must take part in the Geneva II talks on Syria without any preconditions and that Washington does not have veto power to prevent Iran from participating. During a joint press conference in Moscow with Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif, Lavrov insisted, “The UN Secretary General is solely responsible for inviting participants to Geneva II, and Iran will inevitably have a leading role in settling the Syrian crisis” (http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_01_1 ... ence-4601/). Russia and Iran are the two major backers of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria and seem to be closely coordinating their positions with Damascus. The possible deal to buy Iranian crude in exchange for Russian goods was reportedly reached in principle during talks between Putin and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani last September in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617). While meeting Putin this week in Moscow, Zarif announced that Iran hopes Putin will visit Tehran “very soon,” confirmed that Rouhani is very pleased with talks on the phone with Putin “several days ago,” and that “we [Iranian authorities] are ready to fulfill all that has been agreed with you [Russia]” (http://www.interfax.ru/news/352025).
The Russian companies that will handle the oil bypassing Western sanctions and the banks that will handle the revenue and channel it back to Tehran may expect hefty discounts and under-the-table kickbacks. Most likely, those involved will be not Russian oil majors, since there is a threat that the US may slap sanctions in revenge, but smaller entities closely connected to Kremlin insiders and the Russian security services (the “siloviki”). In fact, a dramatic increase in Iranian oil exports may sway the world price of oil lower—to the overall disadvantage of Russia’s oil majors and the national budget. But when special Kremlin-connected interests are involved, overall national interests take a backseat.
Anatoly Chubais, former deputy prime minister, privatization tsar in the 1990s and liberal politician also known to be well connected to Putin, commented that he did not know the particulars of the possible oil deal with Iran, but that “this is a political, rather than an economic decision.” According to Chubais, “Iran and Syria are the greatest Russian geopolitical triumphs in the last 10–15 years” and “victory may come with a price.” Russia forced the Barack Obama administration to abandon plans to militarily punish the al-Assad regime for using chemical weapons against the opposition and imposed on the West its opinion that Tehran must be appeased to make progress on its nuclear issue—a view shared by many in Moscow (http://ria.ru/world/20140116/989533840. ... z2qYai6nqk). Apparently the Obama administration is increasingly seen in Moscow as an easy pushover. The White House may fret and protest if Russia acts as a semi-criminal “fence” (a buyer and seller of stolen goods) of sorts that pushes Iranian crude on the world market, but is not inclined to do anything drastic because it badly needs the support of Putin—the victorious and dominant world politician who has seemingly triumphed over Obama time and again.
YMix wrote:Russia Is Prepared to Sell Iranian Oil as Its Own
By: Pavel Felgenhauer
The Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem have flown to Moscow on the same plane this week to meet their Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, to discuss the situation in Syria and the Geneva II peace conference due later this month. Zarif also met with President Vladimir Putin to reportedly discuss an unprecedented deal to barter Iranian oil for Russian goods. Informed sources in the Russian government have confirmed that Moscow is in the process of finalizing an agreement to buy half a million barrels of Iranian crude a day, while Iran will buy Russian goods in exchange. At present, Iran exports only a million barrels a day as a result of United States and European Union sanctions aimed to curtail its nuclear program. Western-imposed banking restrictions have also severely hampered Iran’s ability to freely use its oil revenue. China is currently Iran’s biggest oil buyer, taking in some 420,000 barrels of crude a day in exchange for other goods. If the oil deal with Russia goes ahead, Iran may extend its shrunken oil exports by 50 percent and collect some $1.5 billion in extra revenue a month. This may undermine Western sanctions, which may have forced Iran to consider permanently constraining its nuclear program in the first place; while Russia may become Iran’s main oil buyer (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617).
Of course, unlike China, Korea and India, which have traditionally imported Iranian oil for domestic consumption, Russia is one of the world’s biggest oil producers and exporters. Russia does not need Iranian crude, its refineries are not designed to use it, and Russia does not have import facilities to handle Iranian crude from the Gulf—its oil ports are exclusively exporting facilities. Moreover, it is hardly feasible for Russia to offer Iran some $18 billion worth of needed goods a year to barter the oil, since Russia mostly exports oil, natural gas and metals itself. A Russia government source has explained: “The deal with Iran will not be simple barter—it will involve money—and since Russia did not undersign Western anti-Iranian sanctions, we are not obliged to wait for them to be removed.” Russia may sell the Iranian crude in the Asia-Pacific region to “increase its presence and influence in this growing market.” (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617).
Moscow has performed similar deals in the past: During the long and bloody Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, Russia was sending the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein massive amounts of weaponry and receiving large amounts of Iraqi crude in exchange. The Soviet Union did not need this crude and could not physically import it (same as Russia today), so the oil was sold to other customers, primarily India—a Cold War ally. Today, Russia may again take Iranian crude, rename it “Russian” and sell it as its own. Tehran will receive part of the proceeds in cash and part in Russian goods. This could effectively breach the US-led trade and financial blockade and make Tehran less inclined to make serious concessions on its nuclear program. The US administration has expressed concern about Russian plans to “buy Iranian crude,” but Russian foreign ministry officials told journalists: “We told the Americans it is none of their business; we may buy any amount of Iranian oil and sell Iran any goods we choose.” Russia it not breaching any mandatory United Nations sanctions by buying Iranian crude and selling Iran goods, the officials noted, while the unilateral Western oil and financial sanctions against Iran “are illegitimate” (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617).
Furthermore, Moscow is insisting that Tehran must take part in the Geneva II talks on Syria without any preconditions and that Washington does not have veto power to prevent Iran from participating. During a joint press conference in Moscow with Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif, Lavrov insisted, “The UN Secretary General is solely responsible for inviting participants to Geneva II, and Iran will inevitably have a leading role in settling the Syrian crisis” (http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_01_1 ... ence-4601/). Russia and Iran are the two major backers of the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria and seem to be closely coordinating their positions with Damascus. The possible deal to buy Iranian crude in exchange for Russian goods was reportedly reached in principle during talks between Putin and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani last September in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit (http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2384617). While meeting Putin this week in Moscow, Zarif announced that Iran hopes Putin will visit Tehran “very soon,” confirmed that Rouhani is very pleased with talks on the phone with Putin “several days ago,” and that “we [Iranian authorities] are ready to fulfill all that has been agreed with you [Russia]” (http://www.interfax.ru/news/352025).
The Russian companies that will handle the oil bypassing Western sanctions and the banks that will handle the revenue and channel it back to Tehran may expect hefty discounts and under-the-table kickbacks. Most likely, those involved will be not Russian oil majors, since there is a threat that the US may slap sanctions in revenge, but smaller entities closely connected to Kremlin insiders and the Russian security services (the “siloviki”). In fact, a dramatic increase in Iranian oil exports may sway the world price of oil lower—to the overall disadvantage of Russia’s oil majors and the national budget. But when special Kremlin-connected interests are involved, overall national interests take a backseat.
Anatoly Chubais, former deputy prime minister, privatization tsar in the 1990s and liberal politician also known to be well connected to Putin, commented that he did not know the particulars of the possible oil deal with Iran, but that “this is a political, rather than an economic decision.” According to Chubais, “Iran and Syria are the greatest Russian geopolitical triumphs in the last 10–15 years” and “victory may come with a price.” Russia forced the Barack Obama administration to abandon plans to militarily punish the al-Assad regime for using chemical weapons against the opposition and imposed on the West its opinion that Tehran must be appeased to make progress on its nuclear issue—a view shared by many in Moscow (http://ria.ru/world/20140116/989533840. ... z2qYai6nqk). Apparently the Obama administration is increasingly seen in Moscow as an easy pushover. The White House may fret and protest if Russia acts as a semi-criminal “fence” (a buyer and seller of stolen goods) of sorts that pushes Iranian crude on the world market, but is not inclined to do anything drastic because it badly needs the support of Putin—the victorious and dominant world politician who has seemingly triumphed over Obama time and again.
.
Nashi is an increasingly popular political youth organization in Russia with direct ties to the Kremlin. Officially, its goal is to support the current political system by creating a future elite among the brightest and most loyal Russian teenagers. But the organization also works to prevent the political opposition from spreading their views among young people.
Masha with Putin
16-year-old Masha Drokova, a Nashi commissar and spokesperson, is an ambitious middle-class student from the outskirts of Moscow. After joining Nashi at the age of 15, she moves to the very top of the organization, and is rewarded for her dedication with a university scholarship, an apartment, and even a pro-Putin talk show.
Everything changes when Drokova becomes acquainted with a group of liberal journalists, including popular anti-Putin reporter Oleg Kashin. At first, she remains devoted to Nashi while pursuing tentative friendships with its left-wing critics — but when Kashin is brutally beaten by "unknown perpetrators," she has a genuine change of heart and decides to take a stand.
"In her first feature, Danish filmmaker Lise Birk Pedersen offers a chilling view of modern Russia, its fragile — perhaps illusory — democracy, and Nashi's alarmingly fascist tendencies (mass rallies, book burnings, "patriotic education," and vilification of opponents). But, distinguished by an artful, cinematic aesthetic and astonishing intimacy, the film's emotional weight lies in the evolution of Masha's political consciousness. Putin's Kiss reminds us that all politics are deeply personal."
(John Nein, Sundance Film Festival)
Director: Lise Birk Pedersen
Producer: Helle Faber (Enemies of Happiness, The Dark Side of Chocolate)
Cinematographer: Lars Skree (Armadillo)
Editors: Janus Billeskov Jansen (Burma VJ), Steen Johannesen (The President)
Produced by Monday Productions, in association with Made in Copenhagen
Video at the linkPussy Riot beaten and whipped in Sochi Winter Olympic games
15 minutes ago
Russian protest group Pussy Riot have been beaten with whips by Cossacks who are helping patrol Sochi during the Winter Olympics.
Footage shows Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina, who served prison sentences over a protest in a church against President Vladimir Putin, being attacked as five band members tried to perform a song.
Police questioned witnesses, however no one was arrested.
On Monday, the pair were arrested on suspicion of theft at Sochi, but later released.
... Russian companies are pulling billions out of western banks, fearful that any US sanctions over the Crimean crisis could lead to an asset freeze, according to bankers in Moscow.
Sberbank and VTB, Russia’s giant partly state-owned banks, as well as industrial companies, such as energy group Lukoil, are among those repatriating cash from western lenders with operations in the US. VTB has also cancelled a planned US investor summit next month, according to bankers.
..
It also emerged on Friday that Russia’s top 10 billionaires, led by Alisher Usmanov, had lost a combined $6.6bn of their net worth over the past week, according to research firm Wealth-X. Russian equities, which showed more weakness on Friday, have lost 20 per cent of their value since the start of the year.
“You don’t need to have sanctions in place to cause economic turmoil,” said Christopher Granville, managing director of Trusted Sources, an emerging markets research firm. “The expectation is enough.”
..
Data published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York sparked speculation that the Russian central bank was also reducing its vulnerability to potential sanctions. The data showed a drop of $105bn in Treasuries held by foreign institutions for the week ending March 12.
“We can only speculate about who might have decided to move their securities out of the Fed and into a third-party custodian, but one obvious candidate is Russia,” said Lou Crandall at Wrightson Icap.
Russia held $138.6bn in US government debt at the end of December, according to the US Treasury.
One senior Moscow banker said 90 per cent of investors were already behaving as if sanctions were in place, adding that this was “prudent exposure management”.
These moves represent the flipside of the more obvious withdrawal of western money from Russian markets that has been evident over the past fortnight.
Traders and bankers said US banks had been particularly heavy sellers of Russian bonds. According to data from the Bank for International Settlements, US banks and asset managers between them have about $75bn of exposure to Russia.
..
Although foreign banks have not yet begun cutting credit to Russian companies en masse, bankers said half a dozen live deals to fund some of Russia’s biggest companies were in limbo as lenders waited to see how punitive western sanctions would be.
Bankers said Barclays of the UK had withdrawn from a plan with Russia’s VTB jointly to fund an Essar Energy deal. Barclays declined to comment.
Alexei Kudrin, a former Russian finance minister and a member of Vladimir Putin’s economic council, warned on Thursday that sanctions could drive an extra $50bn of capital outflows from the Russian economy per quarter.
The New York Fed and Russia’s central bank declined to comment, as did Sberbank, VTB and Lukoil.
Meanwhile, in a sign of the EU’s continuing economic ties to Russia, South Stream*, the gas pipeline project backed by Gazprom of Russia, Eni of Italy, EDF of France and BASF of Germany, announced that it had signed a contract worth about €2bn with Saipem of Italy to build the offshore stretch of the route under the Black Sea from Russia to Bulgaria. Construction is scheduled to start in June.
West tried to do this in Iran .. reason it did not work in Iran is because of "western track record in history of Iran of last 300 yrs"The Western nations have spent a tremendous amount of time and effort in influencing Ukrainian society and leading it to the present situation. .
..
Rossotrudnichestvo has been doing everything it can to maintain Russian cultural influence in Ukraine, but the European Union and the United States have incomparably greater resources, Kosachev said in an interview with the business daily Vedomosti (Rossotrudnishestvo is the federal body in charge of humanitarian cooperation and the welfare of the Russian Diaspora within the Foreign Ministry).
The Russian side has worked to maintain the existing level of its cultural presence – it organized events promoting Russian language, helped Ukrainian students study in Russian universities, organized exhibitions, concerts and other events, Kosachev said in the interview.
“But all this cannot be compared to the long and pre-planned campaign executed in Ukraine by the European Union and the United States in which they made important addresses, including those concerning ideology – directly targeting the community, the Ukrainian mass media and non-government organizations, expert groups and younger people. Communication with the state authorities or business circles was significantly smaller,” the Russian official noted. “They spent gigantic resources on this massive ideological sowing resulting in powerful shoots in the form of the ‘Euromaidan’ [violent riots in the Ukrainian capital that started after the authorities scrapped the plan to sign an association agreement with the EU],” Kosachev said.
The head of the Foreign Cooperation Agency noted that in order to keep up and compensate for the damages Russia must launch a major refurbishment in its work with the public, not only in Ukraine, but in all former Soviet republics. He added that the Foreign Ministry had already addressed Russia’s leaders with a plan allowing for a future breakthrough. Its main point is that Russia should not rely solely on diplomats and other officials in maintaining friendly relations with neighbors, but should make this a mission for the community as a whole.
“Russia’s soft power is only getting into full flavor when the information about us is not presented through the mirror of the press or explanations of dishonest expositors and also not by ourselves, but instead by ordinary people and our partners abroad,” Kosachev told the newspaper.
The official elaborated that in the case of Ukraine, the benefits of EU association were presented not by Brussels bureaucrats, but by Ukrainian activists on Independence Square.
“Ukrainians themselves were explaining the attractiveness of this project to each other, while our projects, our hopes and intentions were presented by us alone,” Kosachev noted.
The Russian parliament has repeatedly blasted the involvement of foreign officials and politicians into internal affairs of Ukraine. When the events took a violent turn in the beginning of this year, both the lower and upper houses passed addresses to foreign colleagues asking them not to interfere in the crisis and warning of dire consequences for the Ukrainian state and its people.
“No one is shooting us, you see there are no people in fatigues,” said Tatyana, a 61-year-old monitor at the polling station, who declined to give her last name claiming that Ukrainian authorities might bring a criminal case against her for separatism.
“You see 90 per cent people here speak Russian why shouldn’t we be able to speak our own language here,” she said.
Tamara Popova, a pensioner, said she and her family had all voted for Russia and they didn’t know one acquaintance who had not voted for Crimea to become part of Russia. “My father freed Sevastopol from the fascists. And now the fascists have come back to power in Kiev,” she said.
..
A majority of ethnic Russians, who make up about 60 per cent of the population, are expected to vote in favour of Crimea being incorporated into Russia. The peninsula was part of Russia until 1954 when Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev gave it to Ukraine, and Crimea’s Russians see Sunday’s plebiscite as a chance to right a historical wrong.
That sentiment is strongest in Sevastopol, home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, and synonymous with the heroic battles of the Crimean War.
..
Many voters said they were influenced by an attempt by Ukraine’s new rulers to downgrade the status of the Russian language – which was blocked by the acting president, Oleksandr Turchinov. “How can they ban us from speaking our native language?” said Yelena Sheremeta, who was voting at Simferopol’s 25th grammar school. She said she was nostalgic for the Soviet Union, when “no-one made any distinction between nationalities”. “We want to go back to that time, back to the Soviet Union”.
.. that should tell you something went wrong when people want to go back to Soviet UnionHow true!Typhoon wrote:The old religions had the right idea: promise a paradise in a metaphysical afterlife rather than heaven on earth.
Not a single customer complaint to date.
Parodite wrote:c_uCqAHW0bw
You are welcome, HP. Just thought for some Mericans it might help know a bit more about Western Europe too. Socialism is dead here for 3 decades already. Yet the likes of Mr. P. keeps willfully lying about it. Tyring stupid Mewicans.Heracleum Persicum wrote:Thank you, Parodite, long but interesting
Amen! Selling ideology is the best career.Typhoon wrote:The old religions had the right idea: promise a paradise in a metaphysical afterlife rather than heaven on earth.
Not a single customer complaint to date.
"There is absolutely sufficient (Russian) force postured on the eastern border of Ukraine to run to Transdniestria if the decision was made to do that and that is very worrisome."
NATO had tried to make Russia a partner but "now it is very clear that Russia is acting much more like an adversary than a partner," he said.
Russia can turn US to radioactive ash - Kremlin-backed journalist
Sun Mar 16, 2014 6:07pm EDT
By Lidia Kelly
MOSCOW, March 16 (Reuters) - A Kremlin-backed journalist issued a stark warning to the United States about Moscow's nuclear capabilities on Sunday as the White House threatened sanctions over Crimea's referendum on union with Russia.
"Russia is the only country in the world that is realistically capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash," television presenter Dmitry Kiselyov said on his weekly current affairs show.
Behind him was a backdrop of a mushroom cloud following a nuclear blast.
Kiselyov was named by President Vladimir Putin in December as the head of a new state news agency whose task will be to portray Russia in the best possible light.
His remarks took a propaganda war over events in Ukraine to a new level as tensions rise in the East-West standoff over Crimea, a southern Ukrainian region which is now in Russian forces' hands and voted on Sunday on union with Russia.
Russian television showed images of ethnic Russians in Crimea dancing, singing and celebrating the referendum but followed them with accusations that Kiev's new authorities and the West have allowed ultra-nationalists to attack Russian-speakers in eastern Ukraine.
Kiev and the West blame the violence in eastern Ukraine on pro-Russian groups and say the Crimea referendum is illegitimate. The United States has warned of imminent sanctions against Moscow.
OUTSPOKEN COMMENTS
Kiselyov is an outspoken defender of Putin and once caused outrage by saying the organs of homosexuals should not be used in transplants.
His show portrayed the Ukrainian authorities as unable to maintain law and order. Putin made a similar charge in a telephone conversation with U.S. President Barack Obama on Sunday.
Such remarks have caused concern in Kiev that Moscow might send troops to eastern Ukraine, acting on a vote in Russian parliament allowing him to use the armed forces if compatriots are deemed in need of protection in Ukraine.
As the crisis escalated, the news in Russia has taken on shades of Soviet-era propaganda, with reporters peppering reports with references to what they say was the cooperation of some Ukrainians with the Nazis in World War Two.
There is also now growing menace in some of the reports, as well as echoes of the Cold War.
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev gifted Crimea to Ukraine in 1954, when Ukraine and Russia were both parts of the Soviet Union.
Many people in Crimea hope union with Russia will bring better living conditions and make them citizens of a country capable of asserting itself on the world stage.
Others see the referendum as a land grab by the Kremlin as Ukraine's new rulers try to move the country towards the European Union and away from Russia's sway.
Just like the SU was in it's day . . .Heracleum Persicum wrote:any comment about Russia coming from anybody east of Oder-Neisse is 2B taken with a grain of saltYMix wrote:Well, if the Russians say it, it must be true.
Also:
[...] President Putin was livid in his disgust at the attacks. He said there was no justification, whatsoever, for the killing of innocent civilians [...]
.
come on YMix, Russia now a democracy
.
Typhoon wrote:Just like the SU was in it's day . . .Heracleum Persicum wrote:any comment about Russia coming from anybody east of Oder-Neisse is 2B taken with a grain of saltYMix wrote:Well, if the Russians say it, it must be true.
Also:
[...] President Putin was livid in his disgust at the attacks. He said there was no justification, whatsoever, for the killing of innocent civilians [...]
.
come on YMix, Russia now a democracy
.
Russia-24 also reports that 135 foreign observers from 23 nationalities have been accredited as well as 623 journalists from 169 mass medias. Russia-24 also reported that apart from foreign observers there will be 1240 Crimean observers.
..
Contrary to the reports of 135 international observers from 23 countries, the Western media in chorus has suggested without a shred of evidence that the elections were rigged and that Crimea was under Russian military occupation.
The observer mission reports which include members of the European Parliament have been casually ignored by the mainstream Western media: Mateus Piskorkski, the leader of the European observers’ mission and Polish MP: “Our observers have not registered any violations of voting rules.”
..
The International Mission of independent international observers considers that voting and counting of votes on the referendums in the Republic of Crimea and in the city of Sevastopol took place in accordance to the international election standards and the approved rules of its carrying, in maintenance of the principles of universal and equal right for participation in the referendums at ballot, principles of openness, publicity, justice and a transparency. The results of referendum are honest and reflect will of participants of a referendum.
Kiselyov is not only a firebrand, he is also an i*iot.Doc wrote:A Kremlin-backed journalist issued a stark warning to the United States about Moscow's nuclear capabilities on Sunday as the White House threatened sanctions over Crimea's referendum on union with Russia.
"Russia is the only country in the world that is realistically capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash," television presenter Dmitry Kiselyov said on his weekly current affairs show.
Behind him was a backdrop of a mushroom cloud following a nuclear blast.
!
http://rt.com/news/ukraine-government-f ... -gysi-997/
I also have very much criticism towards NATO and the EU. They have not realized back in 1990 that they should create a new security organization, with no Warsaw pact and no NATO. Not without Russia, nor against Russia, but with Russia – a common security alliance. And against promises that were given during the time of German reunification, the further expansion of NATO towards the east took place so that Russia slowly would become encircled. Then there were missiles stationed in Poland and Czech Republic...the Russian side has said that it reduces its security, but the Western side was not interested in hearing that.
Then, they said that those missiles are not targeting Russia. That's when the Russian foreign minister said to his US counterpart: 'If we install rockets in Mexico, would you trust us if we say it's against Colombia or Cuba, and has nothing to do with the USA?' Of course they would not believe in that, but in spite of that it [missiles installation in Europe] has happened.
Then there were other mistakes. I don't want to go into too many details. George W. Bush has suggested to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. Naturally it was a provocation, even the former American minister of defense said that.
And then it came to the issue of Ukraine, where it came to tensions between two sides – Russia and the EU – when they said: ‘Either you enter into the alliance with us or with the other.’ And nobody has realized that Ukraine should have been a bridge between the EU and Russia, and that is bothering me.
Now there are talks of sanctions against Russia and also against the former Ukrainian president and his staff. And I see it as one sided. Why not also against the oligarchs that supported the opposite side? There is a lot of Ukranian property located in France and other countries, and both sides have contributed to the current situation...
I think, as Russia pointed it out, that sanctions against it are wrong. And I find it wrong alone that they say: 'We need to bring NATO all the way to the borders.’ I see it the other way around...I would go for a diplomatic way to engage Russia and propose to them a new relationship with the EU and NATO, to find a security concept with Russia, not against it or without it. I would expand trade relations, under one condition: that there would be no more countries or parts of them that would be turned into a Russian territory.
