Thread: Bowing to Russia

Today his popularity rating dropped to 39%, I wonder if anybody who voted for him is feeling a bit sorry and foolish!

You mean we americans have a consiousness? Nahhh, that's a myth. People will stand by their decisions till the day they die, maybe even the day after.

I voted Kerry

Originally Posted by JB

Well the Russian media also is just as biased against the west! On Russian TV almost 95% of the news reports about the west are negative, over exagerations and just plain BS.

95% news are "negative"??? This is obviously very far from truth...

Originally Posted by JB

During the big hurricane they reported 100,000 deaths, aligators swimming down every street (yes there was video of an alligator)and the demise of the whole American South.

As far as I can remember: nobody was claiming "100,000 deaths", just quoted *american* prognosis, supposing such number of victims may be real. I can't remember anything about swimming alligators (but, maybe just missed it ). And, if media are telling what this disaster manifests some very serious problems with modern America, they are obviously right -- is anybody here going to deny it?

Originally Posted by JB

Then came the outrage on the radio talk shows about how the Americans were letting all of the people starve to death after the waters receded. No mention of FEMA, Red Cross, or other disaster services that were taking care of the victims. Only outrage that Bush had not accepted help from the Russian emergency disaster team.

Again: all media were telling what there were a lot of international organisations providing aid for victims. Nobody was telling it was only a Russian MChS going to help, and nobody else.

And when I'm in America I see on TV the same bias against Russia. So in spite of what your history books say, the Cold War is still going on, just dressed up in modern clothing.

Here I mostly agree: yes, the Cold War is in progress (I'm afraid it never ended in fact).
But, IMHO, the Russian media are more objective.

So Scorpio how do you know that Russian media is telling any truth about America? Last winter the big rains and landslides in California were shown daily on Moscow TV. The video was taken from California news channels showing massive landslide and raging rivers. Every day was reported of numerous deaths. All of my friends and teachers offered me condolences for the massive disaster in my home state.
When I came home in February I went looking for death and destruction. Only found sunshine and blooming flowers, same as every winter. Yes we had had a big rain season but those disasters were only one landslide in an isolated area along the ocean cliffs (typical event for California). Russian TV had been showing the same film over and over again for every rain story, even though the film was of something that happened far away from what they were reporting on.

FEMA is not an international organization. It is an American disaster relief that is providing $2000 cash +1 year free rent to people who lost their homes during the disaster. The American Red Cross provides food clothing, medical care and emergency shelter. Also numerous other American private and religious agencies were supplying diaster assistance. But the Russian talk shows were claiming that the USA (led by G.Bush) was REFUSING international aid and leaving the victims to suffer and die. No mention was made that American emergency services were already in operation and victims were being cared for. On TV one reporter was ranting about how awful America was for doing this while a video clip showed victims with FEMA workers. I guess that reporter didn't bother to research who were all those people running around with big FEMA written on their hats and jackets.

Both the Russian and US journalisms are very poor. The Russian media is rigged by politicians, and the US media lives for ratings. If today big ratings are provided by patriotic ranting, you'll see the patriotic ranting. If tomorrow it's the other way around, you'll see the other way around. The public is given what they want to see, hear and chew on, infotainment it's called. Why argue over whose journalism is better and take it personally when none of them is good, any of you a journalist? News flash, there are other countries where the journalism is still what it's supposed to be, and it's freely available through internet.

American media is also subject to political pressure. If they don't report in a favorable or complementary way towards the current administration there may be consequences. In today's Los Angeles times there is an article about a church in Pasadena whose minister preached against voting for Bush (because of the war). All of a sudden they are being audited by the IRS and may lose their religion tax status. This is a legit Protestant church that has been in existance for many many years and all of a sudden the government thinks they are a political organization?

Originally Posted by JB

So Scorpio how do you know that Russian media is telling any truth about America? Last winter the big rains and landslides in California were shown daily on Moscow TV. The video was taken from California news channels showing massive landslide and raging rivers. Every day was reported of numerous deaths. All of my friends and teachers offered me condolences for the massive disaster in my home state.
When I came home in February I went looking for death and destruction. Only found sunshine and blooming flowers, same as every winter. Yes we had had a big rain season but those disasters were only one landslide in an isolated area along the ocean cliffs (typical event for California). Russian TV had been showing the same film over and over again for every rain story, even though the film was of something that happened far away from what they were reporting on.

Well, maybe. But did you see EuroNews reports from Russia?
Almost 100% of them are either about various disasters, or terrorist acts. So, according to this news channel, nothing good happens in Russia at all. And even EuroNews looks objective and unbiased compared with some european and american papers (as I can tell from regular reading of www.inosmi.ru).

BTW, I know, what FEMA is government organisation. Nobody claimed what american government offers to assistance to flood victims -- the point of discussion was more like was it sufficient or not.

Well maybe we are watching and listening to different TV/radio stations in Russia.

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Well, maybe. But did you see EuroNews reports from Russia?
Almost 100% of them are either about various disasters, or terrorist acts. So, according to this news channel, nothing good happens in Russia at all. And even EuroNews looks objective and unbiased compared with some european and american papers (as I can tell from regular reading of www.inosmi.ru).

BTW, I know, what FEMA is government organisation. Nobody claimed what american government offers to assistance to flood victims -- the point of discussion was more like was it sufficient or not.

Well, it seems that people like to hear bad news more than good news.
Our local Nizhny Novgorod news make me particulary sick because they describe every bad event (real or imaginary) with inexplicabe pleasure. Since seriously bad things happen quite rarely, they take every insignificant event and speak about it as if it was no less than the end of the world.
If a doog poops under someone's door, they would show it in every possible projection and speak about it at least half an hour, and blame everyone they are allowed to blame, and ask "how dare we live on after such a tragedy?"

I was speaking to my mother-in-law on the phone last week. She was laughing, telling me that she'd been watching the news earlier and that one of the international stories was about Big Ben, apparently it had stopped chiming!

Hold the front page, breaking news at 11: Really old clock gets turned off temporarily for scheduled maintanance. No-one notices, or would have cared even if they had noticed. Oh, except for ORT. They noticed, apparently. And cared enough to broadcast the story.

It's all relative of course, but I am firmly in the 'Russian TV news coverage is shockingly bad' camp. It's possibly not as bad as American TV news coverage, at least that which America chooses to broadcast around the world (FOX News: acting as a window through which the world can gaze into America's blackened soul since 1990), but only possibly not as bad.

Originally Posted by scotcher

Hold the front page, breaking news at 11: Really old clock gets turned off temporarily for scheduled maintanance. No-one notices, or would have cared even if they had noticed. Oh, except for ORT. They noticed, apparently. And cared enough to broadcast the story.

And on the second page going back again to the long awaited news about some strangers kicking the living crap out of some other strangers. In Bronx. As for the clock story, my bet is it was made up.

Last February Moscow news was reporting on the "Biggest Snow Storm of the Year"!!!! in New York complete with video of a blizzard. They said people were stranded and transportation had completely stopped. The next day my girlfriend called me from New York and couldn't figure out what I was talking about. They'd only had a few inches of snow and it had already melted.

Originally Posted by DDT

Two years ago this week, Russian law enforcement authorities, guns drawn, stormed Mikhail Khodorkovsky's plane. His arrest and imprisonment, and the insufficient response of the democratic world to his case, represent a great setback for the march of democracy in Russia.

What about it?
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... p?ID=20007

What about it?
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/9288-14.cfm

That is just another example of throwing banana peels and feces at the opponent. What is he talking about? There is no "backsliding on the democracy" in Russia because there is not much to backslide from. There never has been a tiniest control from the citizens over what the government is or was doing, there are no instruments for that. Putin had a chance to change that when he was first elected but he did nothing (no big surprize).

Originally Posted by adoc

That is just another example of throwing banana peels and feces at the opponent. What is he talking about? There is no "backsliding on the democracy" in Russia because there is not much to backslide from. There never has been a tiniest control from the citizens over what the government is or was doing, there are no instruments for that. Putin had a chance to change that when he was first elected but he did nothing (no big surprize).

You are right about 'banana peels' but, please, don't forget he wrote it not for the Washington Post.. It was just a reaction to Mr.Sharansky's article in a 'debating-society'..
Of course, we all see Putin's mistakes and blunders (and I'm really afraid of some tendencies of today's Russia) but I don't understand the West which doesn't want to see what Putin has managed to do for Russia. I wonder if there is a Russian here who wants to come back to those 'democratic' 90's..
Anyway, I think, foreigners should read both articles to understand what has happened in Russia..

Originally Posted by adoc

What is he talking about? There is no "backsliding on the democracy" in Russia because there is not much to backslide from.

Did you read the article? That is exactly what the article stated!

"Regression (Backsliding) implies that one was more advanced and has dropped back. This is simply patently false. Russia was not more democratic and rule-of-law oriented prior to President Putin."

That's not what the article stated, you missed the message. Simply put, the article stated that there was no democracy before Putin, and there is now. The Washington Post stated that there was democracy before Putin, there was democracy under Putin for some time, but the country is backsliding now, as the Khodorkovsky's case demonstrates. I am stating there was anything but democracy before Putin and during. It does not surprize me though, Putin is after all the Yeltsin's henchman and his primary task is and always was to protect Mr.Yeltsin's orifices.

The rebuttal states that Mr. Sharansky does not know what democracy is, and that he is confusing democracy with anarchy. It states that there is no regress because there is progress. I am stating that none of them know what democracy is (or they don't care to find that out), that Mr. Retired Major and Russian Linguist is confusing the unaccountable bureaucratic machinery with democracy. I am stating that there is no regress because there is nothing to regress from even now. (Phew, I repeated it a sufficient number of times I hope) On the other hand, what does Mr Retired Major know? He learns lessons in patriotism and "a sense of someone's soul" from President Bush.

Anyway, agree with me that Mr.Sharansky's article was too biased. And Mr. Hamilton did the world balanced
A paradox. An American defends Russia from a Russian!!! Long live American Retired Majors!!!

Actually I found that funny too

Майoры всех стран - соединяйтесь