Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
|
 |
|
06-03-2008, 04:30 AM
|
#61 (permalink)
|
|
New Member
Join Date: 05-23-08
Country: 
|
Quote:
|
busload after busload discharged tobus station, like locusts And of course emptying our stores of their meagre supplies so there was nothing to sel to locals.
|
so i take it that building infrastructure means absolutely nothing compared to "busloads" of people coming to buy kolbasa or cheese. or maybe they got it for free? im sure Estonian economy did not want the influx of foreign money either. ...didnt you say those stores were only for foreigners anyway? 
Quote:
Quote:
|
sure, the US LOVED Russia in the 90s when she was down, weak, and agreeing to anything. high interest loans, foreigh countries (including US) grabbing as much as they can without having to be responcible, razvorovali stranu gadi...
|
....when all the people who worked for them would have been so much better off growing potatoes on their balcony, having no income whatsoever or producing bulletproof armored vacuum-cleaners? . AFAIK Berezovski, Abramovich etc. were citizens of Russia when they started business
|
im sorry but i failed to see the connection between people growing potatoes and foreign companies not willing to install (unfortunatelly costly but nevertheless much needed) filtering systems in order to save money, or being accomplices to, our local corruption through cases such as aquiring brand new Russian military helicopters documented as "scrap" and then reselling them at full price (just to name a few).
Quote:
|
... after Russia took back its Stalinist anthem etc. etc.
|
the words have been revised a number of times, im sure you know that, and especially in 2000. so are you saying a song that talks about friendship of the people and Russia being a good place to live and to have dreams is more offensive or maybe scarry than glorifying war with "rockets' red glaire and bombs bursting in air"? or how about Katusha, Podmoskovnie Vechera or S chego Nachinaetsya Rodina? they are soviet songs too. are they evil as well? or maybe a Moskvich car from 1980s is evil too?   our (current) anthemn is a great piece of music, get over it.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
"I think Germany is REALLY happy to have Poland as a fairly solid buffer against Russia."
|
yeah and it was the Soviet Union that started operation Barbarossa on june 22 1941. Hello?
|
yeah and the poles are still pissed off of SU attacking them on 17th. of September, 1939. Which gave SU the border with Nazi Germany ?
|
Im sorry i wasnt aware that Poland was now part of Germany. Last time I checked they were an independent european country.
Quote:
|
Losing Ukraine to the West would be the geopolitical catastrophy of the 21st century to Russia. Not losing Crimea. Without it and only with rather small Belarus Russia cannot hope to gain political/economical/populatition gravity to somehow equalize with China, EU or US.
|
no you either misunderstood or misinterprited the idea. please allow me:
1) there are undeniable historic (and cultural) ties between Russia and Ukraine. after all Kiev is one of the 1st (if not THE 1st Russian capital). despite what Ukraine's politicians' personal ambitions are the above is an undesputable fact.
2) eastern ukraine and azov sea is an ideal place for another american base. close to moscow & very convinient. remember how they already tried to sneak in with building materials and weapons not so long ago, but were exposed?
3)if they join NATO, the first thing Americans will do is block the access to Azov sea. it is already a great inconvinience for Russian ships to have to enter Ukranian waters to get to the Black Sea, imagine what will happen if NATO will be there! All that we will have is a little 300 km shore between Krimea and (also potencially Nato country) Georgia. Basically the Americans will controll the entire Black sea 
political/economical/populatition gravity? Ukraine in not part of Russia. all we want from Ukraine is that it stays neutral as was agreed. otherwise we'll have to take Crimea back. 
Quote:
|
There are German base on US soil, sort of , for AF training
|
is this the "base" you were refering to? CNN - Pentagon says German training center NOT a base - May 3, 1996
i never heard of ANY foreign base located on the US territory, and the article conferms that americans believe it to be a violation of their sovrenty.
Quote:
|
Of SATO - did Russia free them during the war or something? Has Russia done anything to them that would deserve some influence in their organization?
|
No, of course not. but my point is: US is not in Europe. Europe and Russia are in Europe. no, im not saying Russia should join Nato and take over instead of US. im saying Europe is fine on its own now, without being America's pets. US violates Europe's soverenty and unilaterally makes desisions where to put its military equipment even contrary to large majority of local population (democrasy in action). Russia gets along quite well with most of europe and some "tensions" we have with few countries such as Estonia need time and diplomacy to heal, instead of US throwing gasoline onto fire all over the world. example: America is criticizing Lukashenko for being a dictator, who in return remimded them that he controls transit of russian gas to Europe. then Russia is viewed as "unreliable" supplier
about SATO, Russia has nothing to do with it, true, but the point was that US would NOT like Russia acting close to America's borders the way America is acting close to Russia's borders.
i think we might need a Putin/Medvedev Doctrine to counter Monroe.
I see paranoia is still a Russian cultural characteristic.
no im just looking at the picture as a whole and seing things for what they are. heres a great analysis: Putin’s censored press conference: The transcript you weren’t supposed to see
Russia isn't strong enough to provide a realistic Cold War opponent for us anymore.
thats what Napoleon and Hitler thought...
actually, "strength" is just a matter of willpower and dedication. 
***not everything is so bad of course, there is a lot of cooperation going on between Russia and the US in many other fields, however it seems there are still a few "McCaines" in the US government who are still living in the cold war mindset and spoiling the good relations for the rest of us. |
|
|
|
06-03-2008, 08:10 AM
|
#62 (permalink)
|
|
WAB BOUNCER
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 11-24-06
Country: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheburashka
Russia isn't strong enough to provide a realistic Cold War opponent for us anymore.
thats what Napoleon and Hitler thought...
actually, "strength" is just a matter of willpower and dedication.
|
No, actually that is not at all what Napoleon or Hitler thought.
Yeah, you're right, strength is just a matter of willpower and dedication. Remember when the Soviet Union was spending a quarter of its GDP trying to keep up with the United States and drove the country into financial ruin while people stood in 5 hour lines just to get the basics? I guess there was not enough willpower and dedication, huh?
__________________
In Iran people belive pepsi stands for pay each penny save israel. -urmomma158
The Russian Navy is still a threat, but only to those unlucky enough to be Russian sailors.-highsea
|
|
|
|
|
06-03-2008, 12:53 PM
|
#63 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 05-12-05
Country:
|
***not everything is so bad of course, there is a lot of cooperation going on between Russia and the US in many other fields, however it seems there are still a few "McCaines" in the US government who are still living in the cold war mindset and spoiling the good relations for the rest of us.
Excuse me but McCain is only a Senator until that time IF he is to be elected.
Last time we checked Vladmir went and made himself Czar without any opposition from your people. I wonder why that is if peace is what they are really after
__________________
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.
Last edited by Dreadnought : 06-03-2008 at 12:59 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
06-03-2008, 15:54 PM
|
#64 (permalink)
|
|
Lost in Translation
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 11-30-06
Location: estonia
Country: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheburashka
so i take it that building infrastructure means absolutely nothing compared to "busloads" of people coming to buy kolbasa or cheese. or maybe they got it for free? im sure Estonian economy did not want the influx of foreign money either. ...didnt you say those stores were only for foreigners anyway?
[b] Sov.Republic of Estonia didnt benefit from shoppers from Pskov Oblast. You seem to have forgotten the economic model of these days. And of all the Sov.era infrastructure projects - as i wrote they made industrialisation projects that made not much economic sense or were necessary - like a factory to refine uranium for first Sov. nucl. weapons. Or power plants that were too big for our needs, or factorys that made components for something else. Almost nothing survived the collapse of Sov.Union. The only one that still stands and is important to economy is the harbor of Muuga, which Rus. is now replacing with their own one in St.Petersbourg. And i will guarantee you that there will be no estonian here that wouldnt happily swapped it to alternative history scenario of 1939 B]
im sorry but i failed to see the connection between people growing potatoes and foreign companies not willing to install (unfortunatelly costly but nevertheless much needed) filtering systems in order to save money, or being accomplices to, our local corruption through cases such as aquiring brand new Russian military helicopters documented as "scrap" and then reselling them at full price (just to name a few).
You are blaiming West for your own corruption? This all seems to be more like question of enforcing the laws - the ventilation and all. This is IMO to be laid on doorstep of the State.
the words have been revised a number of times, im sure you know that, and especially in 2000. so are you saying a song that talks about friendship of the people and Russia being a good place to live and to have dreams is more offensive or maybe scarry than glorifying war with "rockets' red glaire and bombs bursting in air"? or how about Katusha, Podmoskovnie Vechera or S chego Nachinaetsya Rodina? they are soviet songs too. are they evil as well? or maybe a Moskvich car from 1980s is evil too? our (current) anthemn is a great piece of music, get over it.
Better yet, this one YouTube - “олƒбой ’агон , should be good enough - catchy tune, famous, non-agressive and it features you.  . And yes , Moskvitch was pure evil. Esp. the one from the end of 80-s, the 2141.
Im sorry i wasnt aware that Poland was now part of Germany. Last time I checked they were an independent european country.
no you either misunderstood or misinterprited the idea. please allow me:
1) there are undeniable historic (and cultural) ties between Russia and Ukraine. after all Kiev is one of the 1st (if not THE 1st Russian capital). despite what Ukraine's politicians' personal ambitions are the above is an undesputable fact.
2) eastern ukraine and azov sea is an ideal place for another american base. close to moscow & very convinient. remember how they already tried to sneak in with building materials and weapons not so long ago, but were exposed?
3)if they join NATO, the first thing Americans will do is block the access to Azov sea. it is already a great inconvinience for Russian ships to have to enter Ukranian waters to get to the Black Sea, imagine what will happen if NATO will be there! All that we will have is a little 300 km shore between Krimea and (also potencially Nato country) Georgia. Basically the Americans will controll the entire Black sea
political/economical/populatition gravity? Ukraine in not part of Russia. all we want from Ukraine is that it stays neutral as was agreed. otherwise we'll have to take Crimea back.
1. correct.
2. link please?
3. so what ? The Gulf of Finland could be closed by 3-4 submarines laying mines and couple shore missile batteries ? During peace-time AFAIK there are regulations in naval law that see to circumstances like these. During wartime one submarine could block it for/against you anyway.
is this the "base" you were refering to? CNN - Pentagon says German training center NOT a base - May 3, 1996
i never heard of ANY foreign base located on the US territory, and the article conferms that americans believe it to be a violation of their sovrenty.
semantics. If americans would rename their bases to training centers, would you be happy? . Note - it was a PR exercise, to calm public, not that Pentagon changed anything really.
No, of course not. but my point is: US is not in Europe. Europe and Russia are in Europe. no, im not saying Russia should join Nato and take over instead of US. im saying Europe is fine on its own now, without being America's pets. US violates Europe's soverenty and unilaterally makes desisions where to put its military equipment even contrary to large majority of local population (democrasy in action). Russia gets along quite well with most of europe and some "tensions" we have with few countries such as Estonia need time and diplomacy to heal, instead of US throwing gasoline onto fire all over the world. example: America is criticizing Lukashenko for being a dictator, who in return remimded them that he controls transit of russian gas to Europe. then Russia is viewed as "unreliable" supplier
the question is with whom the Europe has more in common - with US or Russia ? Besides geography there is more - history, political system etc. As of Lukashenko - I worked together with a Belarussian girl, US and Europe are quite mild to this *******.
about SATO, Russia has nothing to do with it, true, but the point was that US would NOT like Russia acting close to America's borders the way America is acting close to Russia's borders.
The point is what historical involvment and ties S.America has with Russia ? America has - WW1, WW2, Marshall plan etc. etc. and etc.
i think we might need a Putin/Medvedev Doctrine to counter Monroe.
I see paranoia is still a Russian cultural characteristic.
no im just looking at the picture as a whole and seing things for what they are. heres a great analysis: Putin’s censored press conference: The transcript you weren’t supposed to see
Russia isn't strong enough to provide a realistic Cold War opponent for us anymore.
thats what Napoleon and Hitler thought...
actually, "strength" is just a matter of willpower and dedication.
***not everything is so bad of course, there is a lot of cooperation going on between Russia and the US in many other fields, however it seems there are still a few "McCaines" in the US government who are still living in the cold war mindset and spoiling the good relations for the rest of us. |
.
__________________
If i only were so smart yesterday as my wife is today
|
|
|
|
|
06-04-2008, 05:56 AM
|
#65 (permalink)
|
|
New Member
Join Date: 05-23-08
Country:
|
...no im not blaiming the west for our corruption. im saying that when it was convinient and very much in their interest, they didnt mind the corruption but took every opportunity. so of course the country was "free and democratic". when the lid was closed many in the west became unhappy and went back to mudslinging.
...link? RussiaToday : News : Crimean resort celebrates “victory over NATO deployment” some other souses claim it was to repair barraks for ukraneans. are ukraneans incapable of building their own barracks? i doubt that. most likely the baracks were for the future us/nato "training center" im sure they were also aware that the permission to enter from ukrane's government was not yet issued. the question is why the initial hush-hush? maybe it was a simple oversight by uss advantage, but then why stay in there for almost a month? i guess "popitka ne pitka".
3. so what ? The Gulf of Finland could be closed by 3-4 submarines laying mines and couple shore missile batteries ? During peace-time AFAIK there are regulations in naval law that see to circumstances like these. During wartime one submarine could block it for/against you anyway.
exectly! everything is always a potencial war time strategy, and in peace-time it is used as a tool for political pressure. example: Russian army in Abhazia provides a good pressure for Georgia against a military action. in fact, saakashvilli is feeling it so much that even the unarmed railway troops give him sleepless nights. of course he will keep crying about it to Nato and suck up to US hoping they can untie his hands.
the question is with whom the Europe has more in common - with US or Russia ? Besides geography there is more - history, political system etc.
maybe you should re-read what i stated: "US is not in Europe. Europe and Russia are in Europe. no, im not saying Russia should join Nato and take over instead of US. im saying Europe is fine on its own now, without being America's pets". ...or Russia's, or anyone's pets.
The point is what historical involvment and ties S.America has with Russia ?
did you even read what i said? "about SATO, Russia has nothing to do with it, true, but... US would NOT like Russia acting close to America's borders the way America is acting close to Russia's borders."
i think we might need a Putin/Medvedev Doctrine to counter Monroe.
I see paranoia is still a Russian cultural characteristic.
you know, US doesnt give a damn about democracy. it has great relationship with the saudis and kazakhstan, both are quite very from being democratic but both have oil ! The problem is that when it comes to Russia, nothing is ever "good enough" for the West.  well maybe, if we act exactly like the "leading democracy of the world" does, maybe THEN US will stop throwing mud at us? if we put our bases all over the world, invade a country or two every 10 or so years, have OUR Monroe doctrine (aka Putin/Medvedev doctrine), have our president whose job approval is only 20-30% instead of 70-80 and keep disregarding international laws... maybe THEN we will be as good and as democratic as the US? or will this lead to more mud thrown in Russia's face or perhaps a direct armed conflict? there is a saying in the US "do as i say, not as i do". is the feeling of being morally superior to others and therefore applying double standards sits deeply in Americans' psyche? as Bill Maher said: "It was not good for us to see us, because we are not that good" |
|
|
|
|
06-04-2008, 06:36 AM
|
#66 (permalink)
|
|
New Member
Join Date: 05-23-08
Country:
|
Excuse me but McCain is only a Senator until that time IF he is to be elected
no, i said: "...a few "McCaines" ", meaning: people that are of the same mentality and hate towards everything Russian, like McCaine does. he is still in the past, and will never accept Russia.
Last time we checked Vladmir went and made himself Czar without any opposition from your people. I wonder why that is if peace is what they are really after
bravo! i bet Fox News would be proud of you right now and maybe even shed a tear.
i suppose it really is better to have a president who leads his country into a deep resession and carries 20-30% approval than the one who truly has his people's well-being at hart, works hard to turn his country to a course of economic boom and keep such growth despite the world wide economic slowdown (that started from US housing market collapse, thank you little Bush), earning himself consistent 70-80% approval and trust of his citizens. i guess you are right. it sure puzzles me too, why wont the Russians oppose such a man who "by definition has no sole"? 
click on "The Putin Era. Key facts..." link for economic chart.
BBC NEWS | Special Reports | 2007 | Resurgent Russia
|
|
|
|
|
06-04-2008, 06:58 AM
|
#67 (permalink)
|
|
Contributor
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheburashka
Excuse me but McCain is only a Senator until that time IF he is to be elected
no, i said: "...a few "McCaines" ", meaning: people that are of the same mentality and hate towards everything Russian, like McCaine does. he is still in the past, and will never accept Russia.
|
In Tom Perkin's book, Valley Boy: The education of Tom Perkins, he recounts an episode from his Harvard Business School days, where the Professor asked students what was the most informative section of the Wall Stree Journal. Perkins got the right answer: the obituaries. That's where the real news was.
During Putin's reign, we found out that the KGB's visit to the obituary page was premature. Our old friends are back. McCain doesn't hate Russia, but one would be a fool to not be wary of our resurrected "friends".
Quote:
Last time we checked Vladmir went and made himself Czar without any opposition from your people. I wonder why that is if peace is what they are really after
bravo! i bet Fox News would be proud of you right now and maybe even shed a tear.
i suppose it really is better to have a president who leads his country into a deep resession and carries 20-30% approval
|
Gee, I wish every "deep recession" came with 5% unemployment.
Quote:
|
than the one who truly has his people's well-being at hart, works hard to turn his country to a course of economic boom and keep such growth despite the world wide economic slowdown (that started from US housing market collapse, thank you little Bush), earning himself consistent 70-80% approval and trust of his citizens. i guess you are right. it sure puzzles me too, why wont the Russians oppose such a man who "by definition has no sole"?
|
Such warm feelings for Putin. Perhaps Bush would do better if he took some lessons on creative public relations from Vladmir?
Quote:
June 3, 2008
Kremlin Rules
It Isn’t Magic: Putin Opponents Vanish From TV
By CLIFFORD J. LEVY
MOSCOW — On a talk show last fall, a prominent political analyst named Mikhail G. Delyagin had some tart words about Vladimir V. Putin. When the program was later televised, Mr. Delyagin was not.
Not only were his remarks cut — he was also digitally erased from the show, like a disgraced comrade airbrushed from an old Soviet photo. (The technicians may have worked a bit hastily, leaving his disembodied legs in one shot.)
Mr. Delyagin, it turned out, has for some time resided on the so-called stop list, a roster of political opponents and other critics of the government who have been barred from TV news and political talk shows by the Kremlin.
The stop list is, as Mr. Delyagin put it, “an excellent way to stifle dissent.”
It is also a striking indication of how Mr. Putin has increasingly relied on the Kremlin-controlled TV networks to consolidate power, especially in recent elections.
Opponents who were on TV a year or two ago all but vanished during the campaigns, as Mr. Putin won a parliamentary landslide for his party and then installed his protg, Dmitri A. Medvedev, as his successor. Mr. Putin is now prime minister, but is still widely considered Russia’s leader.
Onetime Putin allies like Mikhail M. Kasyanov, his former prime minister, and Andrei N. Illarionov, his former chief economic adviser, disappeared from view. Garry K. Kasparov, the former chess champion and leader of the Other Russia opposition coalition, was banned, as were members of liberal parties.
Even the Communist Party, the only remaining opposition party in Parliament, has said that its leaders are kept off TV.
And it is not just politicians. Televizor, a rock group whose name means TV set, had its booking on a St. Petersburg station canceled in April, after its members took part in an Other Russia demonstration.
When some actors cracked a few mild jokes about Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev at Russia’s equivalent of the Academy Awards in March, they were expunged from the telecast.
Indeed, political humor in general has been exiled from TV. One of the nation’s most popular satirists, Viktor A. Shenderovich, once had a show that featured puppet caricatures of Russian leaders, including Mr. Putin. It was canceled in Mr. Putin’s first term, and Mr. Shenderovich has been all but barred from TV.
Senior government officials deny the existence of a stop list, saying that people hostile to the Kremlin do not appear on TV simply because their views are not newsworthy.
In interviews, journalists said that they did not believe the Kremlin kept an official master stop list, but that the networks kept their own, and that they all operated under an informal stop list — an understanding of the Kremlin’s likes and dislikes.
Vladimir V. Pozner, host of “Times,” a political talk show on the top national network, Channel One, said the pressure to conform to Kremlin dictates had intensified over the last year, and had not eased even after the campaign.
“The elections have led to almost a paranoia on the part of the Kremlin administration about who is on television,” said Mr. Pozner, who is president of the Russian Academy of Television.
In practice, Mr. Pozner said, he tells Channel One executives whom he wants to invite on the show, and they weed out anyone they think is persona non grata.
“They will say, ‘Well, you know we can’t do that, it’s not possible, please, don’t put us in this situation. You can’t invite so and so’ — whether it be Kasparov or Kasyanov or someone else,” Mr. Pozner said.
He added: “The thing that nobody wants to talk about is that we do not have freedom of the press when it comes to the television networks.”
Vladimir R. Solovyov, another political talk show host, said Mr. Pozner was complaining only because his ratings were down and he was looking for someone to blame if his program was canceled. Mr. Solovyov, a vocal supporter of Mr. Putin, said he had never been bullied by the Kremlin.
Yet last year, his show, “Throw Down the Gauntlet,” regularly featured members of opposition parties. This year, the only politicians to appear have been leaders of Mr. Putin’s party, United Russia, and an allied party.
Asked why he had not invited opposition leaders lately, Mr. Solovyov said: “No one supports them. They have nothing to say.”
Vladimir A. Ryzhkov, a liberal and former member of Parliament who used to appear on the show, said Mr. Solovyov was covering up for the Kremlin.
“He lies, of course,” Mr. Ryzhkov said. “My programs with him were among the highest rated programs of any in the history of his show.”
Mr. Ryzhkov said he was usually allowed to appear in lengthy segments on only one major channel: Russia Today, the English-language news station, which the Kremlin established to spread its viewpoint globally.
“I can go on Russia Today only because they want to make it seem that in Russia, there is freedom of the press,” he said.
After the Soviet Union’s fall, several national and regional networks arose that were owned by oligarchs. Though they operated with relatively few restrictions, their owners often used them to settle personal and business scores. One network, NTV, garnered attention for its investigative reporting and war dispatches from Chechnya.
Mr. Putin chafed at negative coverage of the government, and the Kremlin effectively took over the major national networks in his first term, including NTV. Vladimir Gusinsky, NTV’s owner, was briefly arrested and then fled the country after giving up the network. From that point on, executives and journalists at Russian networks clearly understood that they would be punished for resisting the Kremlin.
All the major national and regional networks are now owned by the government or its allies. And since the presidential election in March, neither Mr. Putin nor Mr. Medvedev has indicated any interest in loosening the reins.
“Our television is very often criticized,” Mr. Medvedev said in April. “They say it is boring, it is pro-government, it is too oriented towards the positions of state agencies, of those in power. You know, I can say that our television — in terms of quality, in terms of the technology used — is, I believe, one of the best in the world.”
Valery Y. Komissarov, a former host on a state channel who is now a governing party leader in Parliament, said television coverage was a convenient scapegoat for opposition politicians and antagonistic commentators.
“These are people who are not interesting for society, who are not interesting for journalists,” Mr. Komissarov said. “But they want publicity and perhaps they want to explain away their lack of creative and political success by the fact that they are persecuted, that they are included on the so-called stop list.”
While the Kremlin has focused on TV because it has by far the largest audience, many radio stations and newspapers also abide by the stop list, either ignoring or belittling the opposition.
There are exceptions: a few national and regional newspapers regularly publish critical news and commentary about Mr. Putin and comments from those on the stop list. In addition, the Internet is not censored, and contains plenty of criticism of the government.
A small national network, Ren TV, pushes the boundaries, as does a national radio station, the Echo of Moscow, which has become the voice of the opposition even though Gazprom, the government gas monopoly, owns a majority stake in it.
The Kremlin seems to tolerate criticism in such outlets because they have a limited reach compared with the major television networks. The nightly news on Channel One, for example, is far more popular than any of its counterparts in the United States. It regularly is one of top 10 most-watched programs in Russia.
Mr. Delyagin, the political analyst edited out of the talk show last fall, said he was surprised to have been invited in the first place. He said he last appeared on a major network several years ago, before he began attacking the Kremlin and supporting the opposition.
“I thought that maybe she forgot to look at the stop list,” he said, referring to the program’s host, Kira A. Proshutinskaya.
(Last week, after a Russian-language version of this article was posted on a blog run by the Moscow bureau of The New York Times, Mr. Delyagin was invited to appear on a show on NTV.)
Ms. Proshutinskaya’s program, “The People Want to Know,” had been censored before.
Mr. Ryzhkov, the liberal former member of Parliament, went on the show last year, but its network, TV Center, refused to broadcast it.
In an interview, Ms. Proshutinskaya conceded that Mr. Delyagin had been digitally erased from the program. She said she had been embarrassed by the incident, as well as the one with Mr. Ryzhkov, explaining that the network was responsible. The Kremlin had so intimidated the networks, she said, that self-censorship was rampant.
“I would be lying if I said that it is easy to work these days,” she said. “The leadership of the channels, because of their great fear of losing their jobs — they are very lucrative positions — they overdo everything.”
The management of her network would not comment. But the network’s news director, Mikhail A. Ponomaryov, said journalists and hosts of talk shows had no choice but to comply with the rules.
“It would be stupid to say that we can do whatever we want,” he said. “If the owner of the company thinks that we should not show a person, as much as I want to, I cannot do it.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:48 AM.
|
| 
Similar Threads
