The New Russophobia 2

Warning: merciless satire follows.

Don't suffer in silence. Kremlinitis can be cured.

Danielle Ryan wrote:

Are you currently following a radical path? Are your friends and family becoming increasingly concerned? Do your views occasionally diverge from the mainstream? Do you ever find yourself watching the BBC and thinking "hey, that doesn't sound right"? Have you ever sneakily grabbed the TV remote and switched to RT when no one was looking? Have you been blocked by the President of Estonia on Twitter?

I don't want to alarm you, but if you answered "yes" to any of the above questions, you might indeed be suffering from acute Kremlinitis.  

Unfortunately, depending on the severity of your symptoms and the frequency of your thought-crimes, you could be in need of an intervention. In fact, regardless of the severity, you should seek help now. You don't need to be a full-blown 'Putin-versteher' to receive treatment. Research has shown that if you allow your symptoms to fester, Kremlinitis becomes irreversible.

Luckily, two world-renowned propaganda experts and guardians of truth, Ed Lucas and Peter Pomerantsev have you covered. The dynamic duo have envisioned a targeted, anti-brainwashing initiative designed specifically to treat sufferers like you. The first step is admitting you have a problem. 

Similar "deradicalization" efforts have targeted supporters of extremist Islamic ideology and have seen great success. Thanks to the tireless efforts of Lucas and Pomerantsev, who have devoted their lives to The Truth, the same methods can now be employed against anyone and everyone that questions the West's permanent moral authority and accepted media narratives -- particularly those who may have "fallen victim to Kremlin propaganda".

It's not too late.

You don't have to suffer in silence.

There's no need to feel embarrassed or ashamed.

Kremlinitis can infect anyone, at any time.

The road may be long, but the dangers are too great to go it alone. Your friends and family will be there to support you on your path back to righteousness and moral clarity. They are rooting for you.

We all are. 

 

Note: If your symptoms are particularly severe (watching RT more than once a week, reading the works of known Kremlin agents like Stephen Cohen etc.) you could be chosen for a new clinical trial, which is still in its early stages of development.

(Go to beatkremlinitis.com and enter your email address, home address, phone number and all your personal details to be the first to receive new details.)

I've provided a link in the general Russia thread, but really much of this belongs here. Another brilliant SITREP by former diplomat Canadian Patrick Armstrong.

SITREP August 5, 2016

Patrick Armstrong wrote:

PUTIN DERANGEMENT SYNDROME. Clinton “knows” he did it but the DNI doesn’t, confirmation bias says another, not Russia says Debka. But it diverts attention from what the e-mails actually reveal, doesn’t it? I am going to collect PDS examples all month, but I can’t resist this one from July: “Russia’s war on drugs is hurting America“; maybe you can follow the logic, I can’t. In the meantime enjoy Mark Sloboda’s list of individuals and political parties that Putin secretly controls.

We're going to be getting more of this. Patrick is collecting this stuff over the next month or so. Should be good ... highly amusing, and may cause the heads of pathological Russophobes to explode.

Blam!

Sometimes we get it right here, and the nasty stuff too. Here, babbler NorthReport, commenting on a former CIA Director calling for the death of Russians in Syria to "make a point",  expresses approval of killing Russians.

NorthReport wrote:

Maybe that will teach the Russians to not cheat at the Olympics

http://rabble.ca/comment/1577834#comment-1577834

The OffGuardian ridicules an article at the Council on Foreign Relations:

" The US bombs civilians by accident but Russia does it on purpose."

But, by all means, read the article for yourself.

Appeal of Russian organizations in Canada

Quote:

Activists of the Russian community of Toronto, Montreal, and other North American cities will protest against the blanket ban on the Russian National Team of Paralympic athletes from participation in the Rio 2016 Olympics. The decision to ban the athletes demonstrates an absolute disregard for the legal right of people to the presumption of innocence. We cannot allow such blatant attacks on our morals, ethics, and democratic freedoms. Unfortunately, we are witnessing increasing politicization of sports and major sporting events on the planet.

No matter how eloquently officials of the International Paralympic Committee attempt to justify and explain their decision to ban the Russian Paralympians, people around the world understand the real politicization and partisanship behind this unprecedented action. Such restrictions on the participation of the entire team in the Olympic Games cannot disguise the growing Russophobia. We have no doubt that such blatant acts of injustice aim at the denigration and humiliation of Russia through the slandering of her outstanding athletes.

It is our moral duty to our historical homeland to make public our disagreement with this policy of hatred, enmity, and injustice by international sports committees. We are driven by compassion and solidarity with the Russian Paralympic athletes who’ve spent years preparing, overcoming their physical disabilities to earn the right to participate in the greatest international sporting event.

Russian Congress of Canada
Russian Canada
Russian Orthodox Unity of Canada
Russian Friends Group
Communauté Canadienne Culturelle Russophone
Le Monde Russe de Montréal

https://www.facebook.com/events/293947927636974/

Reply by the Canadian "progressive" community: Dead silence.

What a Canadian disgrace.

This and the previous image are on T-shirts sold on the streets in Moscow:

swallow wrote:

How disgraceful that the community pays more attention to Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women, structural racism against Black Lives, supporting refugee rights, campaiging to ensure No One Is Illegal, etc. If only they would get their heads our of the sand and see the real oppression, the way Russian athletes are treated by the people who run the Olympics.

If the authorities and their MSM echo chamber can maliciously attack one group, then they can attack some other group as well.

You know. Some group you actually care about.

lol. This lengthy thread is proof of the dangerousness of such Russophobic bigotry.

timebandit wrote:

It's over, move on already.

Spoken like a true policeman.

Quote:

This lengthy thread is proof of the dangerousness of such Russophobic bigotry.

It's only lengthy because any time you feel that Russia has been somehow slighted, you need to make a post or three.  And NDPP, before he stomped off, had to agree wholeheartedly.

But tell us more about the danger!  A little danger sounds exciting!  Danger is my middle name.*

* actually, it's "Daniel", but I'm pretty sure that's just Gaelic for "Danger".

It can happen to anyone.

Canadian wrestler given 4-year ban for doping violation

Quote:

Tagziev, who emigrated from Russia in 2009

Whoops.  I guess you can take the boy out of Russia...

It's a standard SI prefix that means "a million times more liberal".

kiloliberal:  1000x

ultraliberal:  1000000x

gigaliberal:  1000000000x

Fortunately, gigaliberals are only theoretical at this point.

swallow wrote:

Still wondering how you feel about right-wing pro-Kremlin writers mocking gays, women, effeminate men, etc., by the way.

Dmitri whats-his-name is more American than Russian. So "pro-Kremilin" is just some drive-by by you. The bulk of his article is quite good. And it's interesting to see how that article is studiously avoided by most of the last dozen or so posters. It's rather amusing actually. Like cats circambulating around a saucer of milk and trying to decide if they'll have a taste or not.

Never mind. I agree with the right of anyone to mock anyone. Within reason. Fag bashing? Not so much. If someone is opposed to nuclear annihilation, but a block-head about queers, well, I guess I have to find a way to support the anti-war sentiment while distancing myself from the queer-unfriendly shite.

ygtbk wrote:

I just want to know what an "ultraliberal" is.

I think in terms of Russian politics it likely means the Liberal Democratic Party.

Quote:

Platform

The Liberal Democratic Party of Russia aims for "a revival of Russia as a great power." It has opposed both communism and the "wild" capitalism that resulted from Russia's reforms. It favours a mixed economy withprivate ownership but with a strong management role reserved for the state. In foreign policy, the party places a strong emphasis on "civilizations." It has supported the restoration of Russia with its "natural borders" (which the party believes include Belarus, Ukraine and other former Soviet republics). It sees the unification of Russia and Belarus as a first step in the restoration. The LDPR regards the United States and the Western civilization as the main external threat to Russia. The party has harshly criticised the discrimination against ethnic Russians in the Baltic states and demanded that they should be given Russian citizenship and protected against discriminatory legislation.

Professor Henry E. Hale lists the party's main policy stands as nationalism and a focus in law and order. Although it often uses radical opposition rhetoric, the LDPR frequently votes for government proposals. This has led to speculation that the party receives funding from the Kremlin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Democratic_Party_of_Russia

Adam Garrie: New media and the ‘Russia Myth’

"Anyone who has ever been to an abattoir and witnessed the slitting of an animals throat, knows that it is not a pleasant sight to see, irrespective of one’s dietary customs.  Once the throat of the animal is slit it begins moving in a crazed and violent manner, a futile struggle before its ultimate death.

Something similar is happening to western mainstream media, but luckily this implosion of the senses and violent lashings out are the product not of physical violence but of ideological collapse, lack of popularity and decades of discredited theories."

An interesting piece. It also addresses some confusion around "left", "right", "centrist", etc. But I especially like his finish ...

Quote:

On behalf of the entire Russian government which I do not work for nor represent and on behalf of President Putin whom I have never met, had a phone call from, nor a pay cheque from, I’m sorry on behalf of all new media for winning minds, changing minds and increasing our audience.

bwa ha ha ha!

This is actually a blow for new, independent media like rabble.ca as well.

It's nice for political parties that "truth in advertising" laws don't apply to them.

By law, you can't call a beverage "juice" unless it's 100% juice.  In fact, if it's like, 5% real juice you're required by law to call it a "beverage" or a "drink" (or, I suppose, cut right to the chase and just honestly call it a "liquid").

But a political party can just randomly select nice words like "People's" or "Democratic" or "Progressive" and throw them around like they were never intended to mean anything specific. 

Sure.  Or the "Progressive" Conservatives.

But that said, "Democratic" Party only promises that the citizenship shall vote.  As opposed to a dictatorship, or a theocracy or a monarchy, or whatever.

I'm not sure what you're angling for here.

Quote:

Most dictatorships offer some kind of citizens vote so does that prove China and Iran are democracy's not dictatorships.

Do you mean a choice between three candidates from the same approved party, and no one else?

bekayne wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

You mean like the US Democratic Party that was founded after emancipation to prevent black people from gaining any meaningful rights .

The party formed in the 1830s

The party went through many changes and you are right they were in existence prior to emancipation however they were divided over the Civil War and after the Civil War they became the white supremacy and anti-black party.

[quote]

The large Republican majorities made Congressional Democrats helpless, though they unanimously opposed the Radicals' Reconstruction policies. Realizing that the old issues were holding it back, the Democrats tried a "New Departure" that downplayed the War and stressed such issues as corruption and white supremacy. Regardless, war hero Ulysses S. Grant led the Republicans to landslides in1868 and 1872.

The Democrats lost consecutive presidential elections from 1860 through 1880 (1876 was in dispute) and did not win the presidency until 1884. The party was weakened by its record of opposition to the war but nevertheless benefited from White Southerners' resentment of Reconstruction and consequent hostility to the Republican Party. The nationwide depression of 1873 allowed the Democrats to retake control of the House in the 1874 Democratic landslide.

The Redeemers gave the Democrats control of every Southern state (by the Compromise of 1877); the disenfranchisement of blacks took place 1880–1900. From 1880 to 1960 the "Solid South" voted Democratic in presidential elections (except 1928). After 1900, a victory in a Democratic primary was "tantamount to election" because the Republican Party was so weak in the South.

[quote]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Democratic_Pa...

Patrick Armstrong on Putin Derangement Syndrome (in the month of August).

My favourite? How about this little gem from "The Daily Beast" ?

"They’re everywhere: “Putin’s Pawns: Beware the Hillary Clinton-Loathing, Donald Trump-Loving Useful Idiots of the Left .”

Who’s Afraid of ‘Russia Today’?

Hand-wringing over Kremlin propaganda says more about about US media’s insecurity than it does Putin’s reach. By Adam H. Johnson

Quote:

Donald Trump’s taboo friendly posture to Russia has pundits in a frenzy. Every day we have takes in major media outlets insisting Trump is a de facto Kremlin agent, a pro-Clinton Super PAC has launched a Web site to “raise awareness” of “the dangerous Putin-Trump connection” that even comes complete with a hammer and sickle (despite the fact that both Putin and Trump are ardent capitalists), and MSNBC’s Joy Ann Reid had on a guest who suggested Putin would invade Ukraine to steer the election Trump’s way. One subgenre of this frenzy is a renewed focus on Russian-funded English language cable network Russia Today, which critics have accused of going to bat for Trump and working to undermine Clinton.

The latest example of this sub-take is Jim Rutenberg, media columnist for The New York Times. In “Larry King, the Russian Media and a Partisan Landscape,” Rutenberg muses on the rise of relativism and the loss of objective truth in media. This is a typical frame when discussing the uniquely sinister nature of RT, and it’s one worth dissecting in detail. 

A good dissection. In particular, the author makes the remark that if the MSM spent more time giving voice to marginalized topics and people, the the "market" for RT would perhaps "dry up".

posting blocked

So do we know what ever happened to NDPP? Called back to the mother ship? 

Seems unfair to leave all the heavy lifting on this file to ikosmos. 

Here is a good show with Peter Lavelle's latest Crosstalk - summarizing the precipitous and ever-worsening US/Russia bi-lateral relations:

"Russophobia is as American as apple pie": Going From Bad to Even Worse: US/Russia Bi-lateral relations

hosted by Peter Lavelle

- US elections and the prospect of D. Trump winning has the neo-cons apoplectic with foaming rage

- despite Trump's odious promotion of racism, etc., his foreign policy differs significantly from the apocalyptic hawkishness of a prospective Clinton regime

- attempt to provoke the Russians in particular

- US Syria policy in tatters. The State Department, e.g., like a rabid dog, calling for Russians to return home in body bags, could not be less diplomatic in their Sauron-like remarks. Inability of State to distinguish itself from the Pentagon.

- Ashton Carter went to N Dakota and told the staff that the US had to prepare for a new round of nuclear confrontation with the next generation weapons - pitching the 348 Billion nuclear "upgrade" in the US -

- the sham MH-17 report blaming Russia in the last week

- the US Military Industrial Complex gearing up for a long-term confrontation with Russia because ... it's "good for business" and justifies the expansion of those horrific institutions and bloated military budget

- direct threat of US missiles shooting down Russian planes in Syria (provided to the "moderate" terrorists)

- the US wants a confrontation with Russia

- FARS News Agency reported that a US/Israeli/Qatari Intelligence Facility, used for directing/coordinating/command-center re:  the traffic of the Western-sponsored terrorists in Syria, took 3 direct hits from missiles fired from the Russian Fleet in the Meditterranean, as a result of which it was destroyed. 30 intelligence operatives were killed. It has never been discussed in the MSM.

If this really happened, it would explain a great deal.

- divisions between the US State Dept. and the Pentagon. They are screaming at each other in Washington, using Russia as an intermediary. Brazen insubordination by the Pentagon; the real decision-making is made there, already carrying out the expected Clinton policy ... even though she is not even in office.

- unthinkable (to Pentagon) prospect of Russian-backed Syrian success against the terrorists.

- Pres. debates last Monday. Russia mentioned by the candidates in the debate. 1. DNC hacking. 2. nuclear programs. But none of the "hot stuff" recently was mentioned. This is surprising. To some degree, this portends of use of this in future debates.

- the next 2 debates may show a blasting off of Russophobia by the candidates, especially Clinton - the preferred candidate of Wall Street and the MIC. This Russophobia is the new consensus.

- Americans, in what look like larger and larger numbers, do not trust the MSM and, therefore, do not believe the Russophobic bullshit in the numbers they "should". Clinton is not in a cakewalk. And maybe that, more than anything else, is really chapping the ass of all these neo-cons, the liberal "humanitarian bombing" supporters, and all the rest of the po mo blockheads and useful idiots. The script is not being followed and they are ... outraged.

- the "Viet Nam Syndrome" is a real restraint on US policy. (opposition to US troops in foreign countries in the US itself) ... which restrains the apoplectic enthusiasm for war emanating from the Pentagon and its political representatives

ikosmos wrote:

Do you really want the enviro movement to spite its face by cutting off its nose?

You mean they shouldn't be critical of them if they want to be able to be critical of them? If they expect to be heard they should say nothing?

Sounds like a handy solution for some.

And I see we're double spacing now. Is this to do with line rate or page dominance?

(oh... you found the tab. Never mind)

Roger Annis wrote:

It is particularly galling to observe the extreme prejudices towards the Russian government and Russian people which predominate in many left-wing circles. Russia is the largest combined producer of oil and gas in the world. How can anyone in the environmental movement believe that the world, including Russia, can be won to reasoned dialogue and action on global warming when impunity and indifference reigns so widely over the economic sanctions and threatening military posturing by the NATO countries against Russia?

Welcome to the Anthropocene ... and how Russophobia is hurting the environmental movement

Here's an excellent follow-up to Annis's article. Here, Russian environmentalists show Canada what our future might look like.

LNG plant could wipe out salmon in northern B.C., Russian researchers warn

Quote:

The pink salmon runs in Aniva Bay, once among the largest largest in the world, collapsed after Shell built its LNG facility on the Russian island of Sakhalin in the late '90s.

There's no conclusive evidence that the plant is linked to the the collapse of the salmon fishery and the LNG plant was 30 kilometres away from the closest, important spawning river, but Dimitry Lisitsyn — a Russian scientist visiting British Columbia — said the plant had a “significant and sometimes catastrophic impact on the very many species.”

... The environmental movement is bigger than any one country. Better round up the usual Russian suspects, eh Smith? lol.