Thread: interview with ex KGB spy

im on one of my periodical youtube benders and stumbled accross this guy. it's an interview with a former KGB major general and spy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKI1hv7G ... re=related

the videos with Yuri Bezmenov were also pretty interesting

Very interesting... I wonder what Putin thinks about the unofficial interviews like this.

What's "unofficial" about it? The person being interviewed is probably an American citizen since long. Why should Putin care?

And what he's doing is exactly what he's being paid for in his new job...

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Kalugin currently works for CI Centre, a counterintelligence consulting and training firm in the Washington, DC area. He is also an advisory director of the International Spy Museum. He remains a critic of Vladimir Putin, whom he called a "war criminal".

(In other words, perfect as an "objective" commentator on Russia on US TV..... )

Originally Posted by Hanna

(In other words, perfect as an "objective" commentator on Russia on US TV..... )

There are no such things in the world as "objective commentators". Any commentator would just provide his side of the story. It's your personal responsibility to be objective for yourself by listening to the various sides. You can't rely on anyone's sayings just because you think he's an objective person.

That son of a b!tch Kalugin, who betrayed his country and his organization for dirty US money, sold many KGB secerts to US, including many illegal and native agents. Some of those people are still in US jail. Surely he did 10000 times more harm to Russia than that Litvinenko sucker. I wonder why SVR agents assasinated Litvinenko, as Western media claims, who barely knew any secrets and just poured tons of unproved sh!t on Russia, but spared that Kalugin scum?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

It's your personal responsibility to be objective for yourself by listening to the various sides.

The problem is there are NO "various sides" in western media in regards to Russia. They all seem to be singing the same tune, and readers are trained to adhere to a simple rule: "If a person says that something is wrong with Russia, it's probably true. If he or she says that something is good, then they are probably brainwashed or scared of the authorities".

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

The problem is there are NO "various sides" in western media in regards to Russia.

Alright, so that is a stereotype, isn't it? It's rather obvious that anything mass-produced would be [explicitly or implicitly] censored by the authorities. (That's why they're called "the authorities".) There's also the Internet which is more private (not in China & Co.) for that matter. It's really up to you who you think is credible or the other way around.

Ergo: the objectivity is subjective.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

The problem is there are NO "various sides" in western media in regards to Russia.

Alright, so that is a stereotype, isn't it? It's rather obvious that anything mass-produced would be [explicitly or implicitly] censored by the authorities. (That's why they're called "the authorities".) There's also the Internet which is more private (not in China & Co.) for that matter. It's really up to you who you think is credible or the other way around.

Ergo: the objectivity is subjective.

You are talking in Orwell's doublespeak, my friend.
Internet as a source of alternative information about Russia is fiction. Credible Russia-friendly resources in English are few and between. You are deluding yourself if you think that they can make any serious counter effect to the avalanche of negative articles.

I agree, everyone decides for himself what (s)he is going to believe. But people are more prone to believe in something that does not contradict their previous assumptions. By feeding Cold era beliefs with this kind of articles, media programms readers and vieweres in a certain way, closing the circle. And while alternative sources of information are available somewhere, an average person won't look for them, believing in the objectivity of these "experts" ("sure, this ex-spy/journalist/dissident/etc. knows what (s)he's talking about!").

So these subjectively objective articles are just plain biased, in my subjective opinion. )) And they'll remain biased, because inertia in thinking is just too huge. Public opinion will never change while media keeps supporting it, and media will keep supporting it, because that's how modern media works, they don't want to scare away their readers with too questionable opinions.

I know that I wrote a lot of trite and obvious things here, but well.. why not.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

You are talking in Orwell's doublespeak, my friend.

You bet I am.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

By feeding Cold era beliefs with this kind of articles, media programms readers and vieweres in a certain way, closing the circle.

Let me tell you a secret - nobody really gives a [beep]. People are more interested in the latest release of Twilight and Harry Potter than in what's going on world-wide. If you're all for the objectivity, let's discuss the alternative information about the "Chechen freedom fighters" in Russian. Media programs, you un-program.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

nobody really gives a [beep]. People are more interested in the latest release of Twilight and Harry Potter than in what's going on world-wide.

Yeah, you're right. How very convenient. Still these people vote, don't they? They probably don't even know whom they're electing at the moment, but they do hear 'something about these wild Russians'. They think that dragons live here and people eat each other. The wildest the better. They don't care for truth, but if something concerning Russia would ever depend on them their decision will be prejudiced.

Originally Posted by Ramil

if something concerning Russia would ever depend on them their decision will be prejudiced.

That is true. However, let's face it: the last US elections saw John McCain promised he'd push to exclude Russia from the G8 [ http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1536962020071015 ]. Nevertheless, it didn't help him much to get the power. The importance of the other factors had prevailed.

Originally Posted by Ramil

They think that dragons live here

It's B-E-A-R-S! Russia has bears. Not dragons! The dragons live in China. Why to be so ignorant of what's going on in the world?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Ramil

They think that dragons live here

It's B-E-A-R-S! Russia has bears. Not dragons! The dragons live in China. Why to be so ignorant of what's going on in the world?

Russia is the Motherland of dragons!

Originally Posted by Vadim Mo

Russia is the Motherland of dragons!

Nobody disputes that. It's just that Russian bears had presently occupied the entire ecological niche of dragons and as a result the dragons in Russia are currently extinct. On the other hand, the Chinese dragons still successfully compete with pandas and therefore the presence of dragons in China is more established.

Originally Posted by Vadim Mo

Russia is the Motherland of [s:31dqclgw]dragons[/s:31dqclgw] ELEPHANTS!

@Crocodile, aren't Russia and China the same thing? (what I mean is - there's some big country somewhere in the East...)

Originally Posted by Ramil

@Crocodile, aren't Russia and China the same thing? (what I mean is - there's some big country somewhere in the East...)

Not really. You see, Russians and Chinese do not look alike (Russians are tall and Chinese are short). So, it's relatively safe to assume Russia and China are different countries. Their location is definitely a mystery, but in reality it's not that important as the only practical difference between those countries is the "Made in China" versus the "Nuclear Threat".

Basil, the thread on Mongol Invasion is already locked. I got one thing to say with regards Mongol invasion. "All I know is that Putin and Medvedev are NOT rapists!! They are !! Their 'bitterest enemy' is Obama who was caught on video as an anti-corporate activist 'drawing radical plans on the blackboard on how to subvert corporate America'. If I end up getting shot in the streets and die, pray for my soul. I do not intend to die. I am not 'seeking death' like the suicidal Maoist terrorists in the Philippines who challenge the Armed Forces of the PHilippiines and US army in a lopsided battle where the latter has all the chances to win.

Putin has proven his mettle in intelligence. He indeed is the only professional spy in the world. See how he duped Saddam Hussein's generals in order to make it convenient for the US Armed Forces, British forces and the Coalition of the Willing to occupy Iraq. The US is heavily indebted to him. I too am indebted to him. He finally gave me a girlfriend after so many many years of searching.

Originally Posted by крупскяа

#1: He finally gave me a girlfriend after so many many years of searching.

#2: Can somebody here please find me a wife.

You got me totally confused. Is the reason you're looking for a wife that you and your girlfriend had split up already after so many years of searching? Or you were lucky to find a girlfriend a day after you had written your post that you're looking for a wife? Or, perhaps, the "holy monogamy" is not your forte and you want to keep both?

The problem I have with this guy's story is he said he applied for the KGB. I guess you couldn't just apply for the KGB. I read an autobiography about Putin and he also tried to apply for the KGB and they told him that its impossible, if they want you then they'll choose you. He asked them how to be chosen and he went down that path.

Other than that, pretty interesting.