Godfather Putin Among the Grapes of Wrath

Uncle Volodya says, "The reasoning man who scorns the prejudices of simpletons necessarily becomes the enemy of simpletons; he must expect as much, and laugh at the inevitable.
”

Uncle Volodya says, “The reasoning man who scorns the prejudices of simpletons necessarily becomes the enemy of simpletons; he must expect as much, and laugh at the inevitable.
”

There’s something awkwardly touching about Robert Coalson’s enduring faith. Like a child closing her eyes and reciting “I do believe in fairies” three times, he is imbued with the certainty that Russia’s collapse is just around the next corner. And he yearns for it: hard to say why, he must have his reasons, but he doggedly picks through the gimcrackery on show each month and weeds out the gems he believes showcase Russia’s savagery, authoritarian despotism and unfitness to be part of the civilized world. Although it is clearly a labor of love, it must be a hard row to hoe these days, as the country folk say. Russia’s stubborn refusal to collapse on schedule must be disappointing. But like a good zealot, he simply sighs and moves on to the next article of faith.

This post is only peripherally about Coalson, though, because it was his cautious excitement expressed in a Tweet – which I still think is about as mildly stupid a means of communication as writing simple messages on your naked buttocks with a Sharpie marker and bending over to display your intellectual bankruptcy to the world – over an article by certified paint-chip-eater Leonid Bershidsky (Thanks, Peter).

I don’t mean to imply – by calling him a paint-chip eater – that Bershidsky is stupid: far from it. In fact, he is a gifted writer with an elegant, readable narrative style and a command of English that is nothing short of remarkable, assuming it is his second language and that Russian is his first. But like so many, perhaps all of the kreakly (for those not familiar with the term, it is a portmanteau of “creative class”, but beginning with “k” to ensure the hard sound prevails), his creativity is hopelessly enslaved to saccharine liberal daydreams in which the prodding and jibing of the west against Russia are simply examples of tough love on the part of an exasperated parent who just wants Russia to get off its tookus and be all it can be. These dreamers often come from well-to-do and highly educated families with foreign connections, partially or wholly educated abroad; young Leonid, for example, was educated in California and received his MBA from Insead in Fontainebleu, France. He was the founding editor of Vedomosti, a joint project of The Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal, neither of them Putin fans by any stretch of the imagination. Young Leonid left his university studies to return to Moscow, driven by a dream that Russia would join the European Union, and seems to blame Putin because it never did; it is clear he has a hate on for Putin. But although Putin strove for closer integration with the European Union, highly-placed analysts were unambiguous that Russia would “never be ready“, a view that is all the more comical now for western scrabbling to try to seize Ukraine for a prize for the EU despite its rampant corruption, ruined economy and recent appetite for Nazi displays of repressive power. Russia is too big, and not submissive enough, refusing to tug its forelock to the west.

Depressingly familiar also in Bershidsky’s thinking is the reverence of the kreakly for the oligarchs, and their entirely unsubstantiated conviction that with great wealth comes a great desire to do good, exemplified in his article on Roman Abramovich extolling the good that rich businessmen are capable of – and that much is true – coupled to a naive conviction that they will; “But whatever the businessman’s reasons for running in Chukotka, there is a certain justice in one of Russia’s wealthiest people trying to win votes in one of the nation’s poorest regions. One hopes Abramovich is not without his share of decency and some of the wealth will rub off on Chukotka.” Is it just me, or does this remind anyone else of Yulia Latynina’s batty rant that only the wealthy should be allowed to vote, because only those who are not hungry can be trusted not to vote with their bellies? And is anyone else curious why wealthy businessmen are accorded the status of minor gods in Kreakletown, while Vladimir Putin – alleged by the same social demographic to be the wealthiest man in Russia – is a shitheel they can’t wait to get rid of? Is it perhaps because they know he doesn’t really have any money?

Yes, wealthy businessmen almost invariably lift up the poor around them to an ecstasy of prosperity. Like Kolomoisky did for Dnepropetrovsk. Or Akhmetov for the Donbass coal miners, many of whom are spitting out the window of Rolls-Royces right now, thanks to his munificence.

And so it was with weary resignation that I came upon the latest wild tangent of reasoning by Bershidsky; although he is a “Russian patriot” who was moved to see Russia “get up off its knees” (since 1991, a period that seems deliberately contrived to spread the process so as to make it appear Putin had nothing much to do with that resolution and repair, despite the fact that the late 90’s nearly saw the complete collapse of Russia), he took his place in the “fifth wave of emigration” because it was fundamentally dishonest for him to contribute his Russian tax rubles to the theft of Crimea. Yes, folks, even though Crimea was a gift to Ukraine by the First Secretary of the Soviet Union which was accomplished without soliciting the opinion of anyone else in Russia, Ukraine’s claim on it is the only legitimate one. Fuck what the people who live there think.

It’s a pity I have tired myself out, and just feel disappointed and uninspired now that I have at last come to what I wanted to talk about – not Leonid Bershidsky at all, but an article written by him which overturns the silly story that Capo di tutti cappi Putin not only owned a massive, sprawling mansion in the Marbella Regione of Spain, but that he planned to occupy his twilight years in the sunny vineyards, growing grapes so rare and precious that if a bottle of their wine was stolen, Putin would burn local villages in reprisal. Okay, that’s a little hyperbolic, but apparently these grapes are something else, very rare, just the sort of thing that would appeal to an it’s all-about-me dictator like Putin.

And now it transpires that the ritzy complex has nothing to do with Putin. We know this because Alexey Navalny’s anti-corruption scouts ferreted out the real owner, Zoya Ponomareva, daughter of Valery Ponomarev. Bershidsky spends the rest of the piece reframing “nothing at all to do with Putin” so that readers understand that really all expensive property owned by Russian political figures belongs to Putin, and they’re just kind of holding it for him until he decides to take possession.

I don’t know what’s the more depressing – Bershidsky’s flushed-face defense of all-or-nothing liberalism and its values, or the fact that the kreakly will only believe that a stinking-rich scam has nothing to do with the country’s leader when they are so informed by a twice-convicted criminal who has no regard whatsoever for the rule of law, and picks and chooses those he will obey and those he will not.

This entry was posted in Alexei Navalny, Corruption, Economy, Europe, Government, Investment, Politics, Rule of Law, Russia, Vladimir Putin and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

849 Responses to Godfather Putin Among the Grapes of Wrath

  1. Brilliant and amusing post, as usual. I love your writing style.

    • marknesop says:

      Thanks, Danielle!!! I am fond of yours as well, and I thoroughly enjoyed your debut at Russia Insider – hope to see you there again soon!

    • yalensis says:

      Dear Danielle:
      I checked out your blog, it is very good. Your writing style is succinct and very easy to follow.
      I particularly liked your post on the Navalny demonstration.

  2. kirill says:

    Another delectable slice and dice.

    I think the term liberal and liberalism applied to liberasts is a gross misnomer. Their adulation for oligarchs tags them as neo-feudalists and aristocrat wannabes. They hate Putin because he represents over two thirds of Russians and not the 1%. Putin is the rabble given power. He dares take it away from the entitled ones like Khodorkovsky. Latynina’s praise for Pinochet is sickening. This has absolutely nothing to do with Liberalism. She and the rest of the liberasts are intrinsically anti-liberal. Calling the fascists would be a mistake since fascism had and has some accommodation for the interests of the rabble or “bydlo”. These freaks want the “bydlo” as serfs on their plantations. They are the enlightened aristocracy in their own minds.

    I really hope that they take the initiative and brain drain themselves out of Russia. They can learn to love their mythical utopian west from the inside. They will be bitterly disappointed. Sucks to be them.

    • marknesop says:

      Thanks, Kirill – if liberals wind you up, you will love Jim Kovpak’s blog. He posted a couple of comments here, on the “About” page. I don’t expect you to actually read his blog, although that’s up to you (he’s a Schindler fan), but check out the comments section. He and his BFF are sniggering together about the success of their “two-pronged attack” here, and predicting “rivers of butthurt”. Quite comical, really. He’s one of those if-you-can’t-speak-the-language-you-know-nothing types, although he’s quite happy to attribute good sense to John Schindler, who can’t speak a word of Russian – but who somehow mysteriously “gets it”. Funny stuff.

      • kirill says:

        Wow, what a circle jerk of retards. None of those comments have any content and look like the trash you find under youtube videos.

        • marknesop says:

          Yeah, look at his comments here on the “About” page. He’s very big on the “it’s true because I say it is” without any references, and at the same time one of those tiresome pedants who insist because their customary group around the table despises Putin and knows that a liberalizing reformer who would allow them a free press and the rule of law would be sooo liberating, that translates to a huge unseen groundswell of support for their ideology that the west remarks but which Putin simply refuses to acknowledge. Presumably he rigs all the polls to make it look like he has high support.

      • yalensis says:

        Dear Mark:
        That’s funny, how they criticize your blog and the “same five people” in the comments section; and THEIR comment section consists of:

        Jim-
        Jon-
        Jim-
        Jon-
        (etc., for several rounds)

        • marknesop says:

          I wasn’t going to point that out, but I thought it would be noticed.

          Speaking of that, it might be an appropriate moment to thank my tiny circle of readers, because you have gotten 2015 off to a roaring start; we punched through 40,000 hits in January for the first month ever, 43,000 and some. To put that in perspective, my take for all of 2010, the year I started, was less – 42,691. It wasn’t a whole year because I didn’t actually start until July, but it did take almost a whole 12 months to break 100,000, which we did just a bit before July 2011. The readers are of course very important, but the commenters are even more so, because we demonstrated just a short time ago that readers would gravitate to a comment thread which was not headed by a post at all, and contained nothing but comments. People are interested in your opinions, and the site has grown into somewhat of a news aggregator as well, although it was not set up to be.

          In short, we continue to drift where we will, and I’m still having a great time – hope you all are as well.

          • Tim Owen says:

            The phrase “a tiny island of sanity” come to mind.

            Congratulations on the stats and on your insight and wit’s value being recognized. And on another, funny, trenchant take down in the post above.

          • colliemum says:

            Speaking for myself – I sure am!
            I’m desperately trying not to sound like a flatterer-in-chief, but it’s a fact, isn’t it, that the commenters are attracted to this site because of your posts, with the bare thread showing that we also enjoy the sparks coming off the commenters’ witty and searching replies.
            Phew.
            Now I need another coffee …

            🙂

    • spartacus says:

      “They are the enlightened aristocracy in their own minds.”

      Yeap, I think you nailed it. I also think that they seem to see themselves as beacons of light, as the chosen ones who get to guide the ignorant masses towards enlightenment. I never did get it why it’s totally OK if wealthy individuals and/or corporations make huge financial campaign donations to politicians in order to secure preferential treatment if those politicians get elected, but when ordinary people vote for someone whom they think will take care of them, it is somehow reprehensible and, immediately, accusations about “voting with their belly” start flying off.

    • Tim Owen says:

      Well said. I suspect I’m projecting onto Russia from my own particular hopes and fears regarding the future of the west (Canada and Britain specifically, where my close and extended family are), but here goes…

      My favourite comment about politics is attributed to Harold MacMillan who apparently quipped to one of his advisors: “What’s the point of having a constituency if you can’t sell them out.”

      As that sinks in simultaneously a lot of idealistic rot about democracy in the west dissipates like fog in sunshine.

      My point is that politics has become almost completely a process of lawmakers selling influence over the making of legislation. Bankers in the US now literally write the laws that govern them. That is outrageous. And this is AFTER the 2008 crash and bailout which basically featured Wall Street creating the largest ponzi scheme in world history based on precisely the most important asset the voting public will ever have – housing. They rode that up and, when it became clear it was going to blow up, colluded to create a market to short the whole thing and rode it all the way back down. Oh yeah, and the banks that enabled the whole thing got bailed out at the expense of the public. Right now hedge funds are now busy buying housing, notably with cash, that were coughed up by us plebes that were blown out of the housing market by the combination of excessive debt, the economic downturn and the resulting loss of jobs. They will now have the privilege of renting their houses back from the people who engineered the whole scheme that deprived them of affordable housing in the first place.*

      Whenever someone drones on about corruption in Russia the tableau above comes to mind. Russians suck at corruption if one compares it to this abomination.

      But what I think this suggests is this. I have been racking my brain trying to explain the almost universal hatred for Putin and I think it’s partly explained thusly: his record in Russia actually shames those who are “selling out their constituents.” Rising pensions, living standards, improvements in public infrastructures, a reduction in corruption. It’s as if the man actually believes there’s such a thing as public purpose in politics (as opposed to just cheap bromides to these aims while the looting continues.)

      You could almost say, for western politicians Putin has to be corrupt. If he were not this would mean they would have to face their own thoroughgoing corruption and this would endanger their ability to continue their lucrative careers in good conscience.

      * If anyone thinks this is motivated by personal bitterness it’s not. Thanks to the brilliance of my wife we carry a tiny mortgage on a fantastic property she built in the last housing downturn in 92. Not gloating – : ) – just wanted to forestall any suspicion that my outrage is motivated by some personal grievance.

  3. patient observer says:

    Thank you for the rich smorgasbord of delectable imagery that brilliantly exposes the rotten core of liberals! Lest we forget that behind their cultured language lies a primitive hateful savage – Monsters! Monsters from the Id! (a great line from a great sci fi movie)

    My own limited contact with those who have been educated to the tune of Harvard MBAs suggest that they are vacuous beings, having human experience stripped away and replaced with an elaborate GROUP THINK. The better they live, breath, eat and shit GROUP THINK the greater their “success”. I’m trying to adapt a funny line from an Eminenm rap for these folks: Something like “liberals and oligarchs are a perfect match like a vacuum and a dirt bag” (don’t worry, I won’t quit my day job).

    I think the ruling elites have discovered, perhaps centuries ago, that psychopathic behavior can be taught both in the hallowed halls of academia and in catholic seminaries. They hate Putin because he could have been one of them – that ingrate! He must be destroyed – to warn others of the dire consequences for those who can have yet chose to reject wealth and exploitation of the weak.

    • marknesop says:

      Ha, ha; thanks, Patient Observer! It’s good to know I can rely on my tiny fan base, we five or six Putinists all high-fiving each other through 1000 comments or so. I kind of like Bershidsky, and wish he could maintain some sort of coherent consciousness rather than idolizing the American business model while – knowing business is a cutthroat world where the weak are eaten alive – proposing that if Russia were to return the Crimea it stole from Ukraine, it might resolve the situation and cause the west to look favourably upon Russia. I’m confident we both know the response to such an overture would be a lot of chest-thumping and prancing by the west, a lot of bragging about how they had put the bear in his place, and redoubled efforts to overthrow Putin based on a perception of weakness.

      Indeed, initial assessments of Putin were cautiously positive; he was a former KGB man, who therefore would be covertly aware of western superiority across the spectrum and quite possibly a crook into the bargain. Wonderful! But things went south very quickly when western leaders discovered their initial impressions were incorrect, and Putin was not going to play ball.

  4. james says:

    thanks mark. i enjoyed your article. i was unfamiliar with the word kreakly to describe the creative class.. anyone who is creative has enough imagination to know there is no such class.. and, the idea that they would all want to return to some type of past where only kings and queens ruled and everyone else led a life of marginal-ism doesn’t make sense either.. but i think your point is this divide between those with money and the rest of us..

    it seems to me a bipolar choice used to be framed as something between capitalism and communism, not that i ever believed that. i suppose there must always be some bogeyman that is presented as the monster to be gotten rid of (hey we are back to the land of fairy tales, kings and queens and bershidsky’s world again), but it seems to me that these people like coalson and Bershidsky – whoever he is – are the new servants for a unipolar world that can’t appreciate the idea of not everyone walking in lock step with the same ideology too.. and they would rather present life in some simplified manner as opposed to the complex way that it is.

    while we continue to wipe out numerous species in our mad rush for economic success, or rape and pillage here on the planet, it is worthwhile to consider the alternatives. is it such a bad thing that someone would want to take an alternative and independent approach to life whether it gets expressed in world politics or what have you? i think not. i am not sure what these couriers for the rich are trying to tell us, but i think it is safe to ignore them.. those following what they say or suggest, do so at their own peril.

    i suppose i’ll get carried down the stream that carries us all down into the next phase of history, regardless of what i might think. however, i retain the right to think for myself as opposed to have someone else try to do it for me. thanks again for your article.

    • marknesop says:

      Thanks, James – the actual term is creacl, but we modified it here to read “kreakle” to ensure it was pronounced properly, because in the Russian alphabet “C” has only the soft sound, so it sounds like “S”. For applications which in English would use a hard “C”, Russians (and Ukrainians) use “K”.

      “Couriers for the rich” is an evocative turn of phrase, and I will save it for later use, thanks for it. Indeed we will be swept along by the great rush of history, unable to much affect the course of events, but you are right that there is a certain satisfaction in continuing to think for yourself instead of being a bobblehead. And who knows? History might turn out far differently than current conditions suggest. We have been surprised before, sometimes pleasantly, sometimes less so. Confusion to our enemies!!

    • Alex says:

      The very fact that so-called creative class creates in fact close to nothing (they merely re-sell western products and ideas) explains their desperation in proving that all the things Western are superb and heavenly. That elevates them from mediocre copycats to accomplices of Gods.

    • yalensis says:

      Dear James:
      The Russian neologism “kreakl” (=”kreativny klass” = “creative class”) was popularized (if not invented) by the Russian satirical blogger, Lev Shcharansky.
      Here is his blog .

      I know it looks quite alarming, if you skim through it. Nobody knows exactly who Shcharansky is, he writes under an assumed identity. Most intelligent speculation is that he is a Soviet emigre who lives in Spain. He has coined a whole galaxy of “winged expressions” and neologisms, which everybody on the Russophile blogosphere quotes.

      Shcharansky is not a “funny” Onion-type humorist, his humor is mean and savage, more like a Jonathan Swift type.
      His blog appears, on the surface, to be extremely anti-Semitic.
      There are speculations that Shcharansky himself is an ex-Soviet Jew, whose caricatures of Jewish emiges are dead on the money, because he knows their milieu so intimately. That is the most probabilistic theory, although nobody really knows for sure!
      But the fact is, that everybody reads his blog, and everybody repeats his zingers.

  5. Jen says:

    As Kirill, Patient Observer and James have already said or hinted at, this piece hits the nail on the head: that one reason Putin is despised by what we might call the chattering classes across the political spectrum (be they neocons or champagne socialists) is that, having been educated and trained in the same milieu as they, he then enacts policies that actually give power and opportunity to ordinary people rather than just pay lip service to doing so and using that as a shield to hide brown-nosing the real elites.

    Thanks Mark for another hard hitter and more laughs with your style.

    • marknesop says:

      Thank you, Jen, for your kindness. That conclusion actually belongs to Patient Observer, and is one I did not intend to imply, so if people got that inference it was entirely unintentional, although it certainly does have the ring of truth. It would also tie in with their frequent insistence that Putin is a poorly-educated dolt who plagiarizes everything.

  6. james says:

    anyone have that link that destroyed all the bs about charlie hebdo that someone posted in the previous thread? i can’t find it for the life of me, but it was a very good deconstruction of the event as viewed from other events like nato’s activity in serbia.. i was away and unable to save the link, but wish i could have.. any help welcome. i remember thanking the person, but don’t remember who posted it. thanks – james

  7. Warren says:

    • kirill says:

      If he said it, then he is right of course. Britain has had a bizarre anti-Russian slant from pre-Elizabethan times.

      • palmtoptiger says:

        it’s a really interesting phenomenon, the underlying reasons for which I must admit I don’t quite understand. at least in Victorian times, judging by some famous English writers of that era like e.g. Conan Doyle or Oscar Wilde, the image of Russia in the UK was quite different (though I’m not quite sure whether they were representative for the whole elites of the time). same with French or German writers and intellectuals – e.g. Jules Verne mentions St. Petersburg in one breath with Paris or London, I don’t feel any trace of the nauseating anti-Russian propaganda permeating all Western media today whatsoever. stellar scientists like Leonhard Euler even went to live and work in Russia for a long time.

        perhaps the main turning point was the 1917 revolution. while the Tzars were – at least as I see it – people the British/French/Prussian elites could well relate to, the Bolsheviks were a totally different story. and as the USSR gained power and ultimately ended up controlling half of the world, the anti-Russian propaganda in the West also gained in intensity. and it never really stopped after the collapse of the USSR, either, so it’s been almost 100 years now. no surprise then, really, that many Western people have a kind of near-genetic fear of Russia today – it’s been drilled into their heads for about 4 generations now.

        well, half of it is surmise, though, especially about the UK since i’ve never lived there. resident Englishmen feel free to correct me if I’m mistaken.

        • Warren says:

          English hostility to Russia, dates back to when England first establish trading and political relations with Muscovy in 16th century under Queen Elizabeth I’s reign. The English had exclusive rights to trade with Muscovy however they were eventually replaced by either Germans or Dutch.

          We had very interesting discussion on the origins of Anglo-Russia antipathy some weeks ago, Moscow Exile historical contributions were very insightful.

          However I think the fundamental reason for UK antipathy to Russia is geopolitical; ideologies and personalities come and go, but Russia remains a big country, big population, with a lot of natural resources, and a major power – that is threatening for the UK.

          • palmtoptiger says:

            certainly it’s geopolitical. everything in the world ultimately is, on the big nation-state scale. not many purely personal decisions made there.

            but e.g. China is also a very big country with a far bigger population, lots of resources, and economically far more power than Russia, at least today. and I don’t see even closely the same degree of hostility for it in the Anglo-American establishment that I see for Russia. and that’s a bit hard to explain, since, in most realistic mid-to-longterm forecasts, China is the much more dangerous opponent to the Western civilization. much more alien to it, in lots of ways, than the Russian civilization, too.

            my personal explanation is two-fold. one, the USSR, no question, was by far the biggest and most powerful enemy to global Anglo rule, ever. and Russia still remains the one and only country on the planet that can definitely put “the West” out of business even when attacked with nuclear weapons and just counter-attacking. and two, China already was completely under the Anglo boot once, during the Opium wars and basically for half of the 20th century until Mao won (with help of the USSR, again).

            perhaps there’s also a three, though this one’s rather judgmental. IMO the Chinese just don’t feel that dangerous for them, both on the personal and civilizational scale. Russians on the other hand – oh, yes. in a fight, the real deal, no question about that. rather unpredictable for the Anglo planners, too. I somehow get the feeling that they believe they can play China, negotiate and blackmail them, pressure with military means, if necessary just defeat them in a military confrontation, etc. all worked fine before. but with Russia they don’t really have a clue what they can do, and that worries them. a lot. so they’re leaving China “for later” and just trying to push Russia as far as they can go, bar an open, hot, no-proxy war (which I very much doubt they’ll take the chance of – e.g. Strelkov thinks so, too, and I think he’s right as usual).

            • astabada says:

              re China.

              In my humble opinion, the difference between China and Russia is that the former can be blockaded and starved of energy in a few years (decades at most).

              Instead a blockade on Russia would not be as effective, because Russia has enough resources to go on for decades.

              Therefore Russia is the real enemy: fold Russia and China follows suit.

            • marknesop says:

              I still think a trigger for the west is that Russians are white Europeans who look like them, but stubbornly refuse to think and behave like them.

              • palmtoptiger says:

                probably you’re right, in the end that’s likely what it comes down to on a really basic, animalistic, level.

          • Jen says:

            I remember being taught at school that English antipathy to Russia really began during the 19th century when Persia and the Ottoman empire were both fairly weak, India was under British control, and the British suspected that Russia was encroaching on both Afghanistan and Persia with an end goal of securing a warm-sea port on the Indian Ocean or the Persian Gulf. As for English antipathy extending back to the 16th century, it may have begun with Ivan Grozny’s proposal of a political and military alliance, sealed with a marriage proposal, to Elizabeth I which she rejected:

            ” … In 1567, Ivan wrote to Queen Elizabeth of England suggesting they sign a military alliance. He also proposed that they marry and offer each other political asylum in the event that any of them was overthrown. When Elizabeth only offered asylum, Ivan took away all privileges of English merchants in Russia in 1569 and upbraided the Queen for putting other interests above “our highnes affairs.”

            When Elizabeth would still not agree to marry Ivan, he wrote her a rude letter in 1571, claiming that she was no autocrat, but a “vulgar maiden.” She replied that “We Ourselves take care of Our affairs as is appropriate for a virgin and a Queen.” The queen invited him to England for a personal meeting “with his loving sister,” so that she could show him that her land was “a second Russia.”

            Ivan IV continued his attempts to marry an English lady of royal blood. In 1581, his choice fell on Lady Mary Hastings, sister of the Earl of Huntingdon and a distant relative of Queen Elizabeth. The following year, he sent an ambassador to England to inspect Mary and negotiate the rights of any children to the Russian throne. But Mary had no wish to marry the fifty-two year-old tsar, even though her friends had already began to call her the “empress of Muscovy.”

            Rejected for the second time, Ivan announced that he would go to England himself and find a bride. Soon after that, in 1583, he began to suffer from a strange disease – a rotting of his internal organs. The illness spread and he allegedly died while playing a game of chess with the English ambassador, Sir Jerome Horsey, on 18 March 1584 …”
            http://www.rusartnet.com/biographies/russian-rulers/rurikid/ivan-the-terrible

            Unfortunately in those days people didn’t know anything about polonium 210 so there is no way of being able to trace the trail of perfidy back to Albion then.

            • Warren says:

              You allude to the death of Ivan IV while playing chess with the English ambassador, this would not be the last time England/Britain was suspected of assassinated a Russian Emperor. I once reading an article in some years ago Zhirinovsky alleged that Tsar Paul I was killed by the British.

              You are right to point out the Great Game of the mid-late 19th century, when Russia and Britain competed for influence in India and Central Asia.

              The English/British have also killed other prominent Russian public figures too, one infamous and notorious Russian was killed in 1916.

            • yalensis says:

              That explains that scene in Eisenstein’s movie (Ivan Grozny Part II) where Ivan is crouching over a chessboard (see his huge shadow on the wall); and he signs and rolls up a scroll with instructions to his Ambassador to England. I forget the exact dialogue, but it is something like, “Deliver this proposal to our royal sister Elizaveta Anglitskaya..”

              Part II was banned for a while Soviet Union, because Stalin purportedly did not like the portrayal of a ruler suffering one setback after another, and going slowly mad, while his beard grows longer and longer…

          • Moscow Exile says:

            As regards this matter of English (and I stress “English”) hostility towards Russia, I think it possible that the expulsion of English merchants from Muscovy, save for Archangelsk, in 1646 may have become embedded in the psyche of the English “elite” merchant class and that their descendants still bear a grudge to this day.

            See: Muscovy Company

            The Muscovy Company … was an English trading company chartered in 1555. It was the first major chartered joint stock company, the precursor of the type of business that would soon flourish in England, and became closely associated with such famous names as Henry Hudson and William Baffin. The Muscovy Company had a monopoly on trade between England and Muscovy until 1698 and it survived as a trading company until the Russian Revolution of 1917. Since 1917 the company has operated as a charity, now working within Russia…

            In 1571, the company’s right to free trade and navigation down the Volga was revoked by Ivan IV, who had been offended by English demands to close Russian trade to other European nations …This unease between the Muscovy Company and Russia continued to the end of the sixteenth century, under the anti-English dominated courts of Fyodor Ivanovich and Boris Godunov….

            … In 1646, Tsar Alexei I rescinded the exemption of the Muscovy Company from Russian customs, in response to the company’s alleged support of the Parliamentarians in the English Civil War. After the execution of Charles I of England in 1648, Alexei I expelled English merchants from Russia altogether, except from the city Archangel. While the restoration of Charles II of England in 1660 resulted in a temporary thaw of relations between England and Russia, a 1664 embassy under Andrew Marvell proved unsuccessful in restoring the Muscovy Company’s prior benefits. In the meantime, Dutch merchants replaced the English as the dominant traders in Russia. Nevertheless, the company held a monopoly on English-Russian trade until 1698, when it lost its privileges due to political opposition.”

            In short, they had a good thing going but lost their advantage and privileges by demanding too much and by supporting regicide: ironically, the English ended up being viewed as dangerous revolutionaries, albeit that that term did not have the meaning then as it has now.

            They, the investors, the merchant class must have lost a great deal, and they never forgot nor have their dependents in the City that they had been expelled by “barbarians”. I am pretty sure that the English are the only people that had such an expulsion order served upon them before Stalin got into the habit of deporting nations within the USSR.

            They have long memories, do these City of London money-men. I have often wondered why there is no British retail bank operating in Russia. HSBC and Barclays and, I think, Llyods as well, made very short lived appearances here a couple of years ago. The “Big Four in the UK, later the “Big Five” after HSBC left the former Crown Colony of Hong Kong, have, however, shown a marked reluctance to start trading here – and I have asked and asked NatWest, my bank, when they intend to do so, and received off them sniffy answers along the lines: “NatWest has no intentions of starting retail banking in Russia in the foreseeable future”.

            I think the fact that the British government and its financial backers – Rothschilds and pals – is still peeved at the nationalization of British assets by the Bolsheviks in 1917 and this attitude still lingers on to this day. Sounds peevish, I know, but that’s how such folk behave, I believe: Shylock and his demand for a pound of flesh spring to mind.

        • Warren says:

          In Anne Applebaum’s recent column in the Financial Times, she gave some insight into how the UK elites contemptuously view Russians – including pro-West Russians.

          “In truth, the real British attitude to the London Russians is almost a form of snobbery: these people are not like us, so they do not have to be held to our standards, to our laws — and anyway, they were only stealing from their own state, or killing one another.”

          http://www.ft.com/cms/s/94b50dfa-a70c-11e4-8a71-00144feab7de,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F94b50dfa-a70c-11e4-8a71-00144feab7de.html%3Fsiteedition%3Duk&siteedition=uk&_i_referer=#axzz3QKpU0tYj

          • palmtoptiger says:

            tbh, I’m inclined to agree with them there, at least in the first part (not so sure about “do not have to be held to our laws” – I’m really not fond of Animal-Farm’ish “some animals are more equal than others” ideas). I live in Central Switzerland, in one of the most expensive and low-tax cantons, and most Russians you meet around here (those not at universities or doing contract work at Swiss companies) are exactly that “London Russian” or “new Russian” type – basically some kind of nouveau riche semi-criminal 90’s thug or a derivative thereof. Khodorkovsky and the like.

            almost without exceptions, a *highly* unpleasant and disgusting category of people. I usually need just a minute or two of conversation with them, or even just observation, to figure them out entirely and consequently make a large detour around them.

            the point is, though, that when UK (or other EU) elites are sized up against real Russian elites – scientists, artists, specialists doing contract work, even the top current politicians – the picture is quite different. I mean, compare Miliband or Blair with Lavrov. not a very favorable comparison for the former, is it. comparing Putin with any UK or DE politician is really just a waste of time, another league entirely. in science or hightech fields like IT, the picture is also fairly even – lots of strong people on both sides there. Kaspersky, Sukhoi, Rachmaninnoff or Kalashnikov are household names even here. don’t start me on Sikorsky, Nureyev, Baryshnikov, Nabokov, Gamov, and the legion of them emigres..

            I regularly do encounter the abovementioned snobbish attitude extrapolated to *all* Russians, not just the nouveau-riche “bratki” types. but IMO that’s just an indicator of a total lack of culture and simple factual knowledge, and anyone who assumes such a standpoint hardly deserves to be called “elite” anyway.

            • colliemum says:

              Thanks – great observations, but why stop at Blair and Miliband in your excellent comparison to Lavrov? The former Foreign Secretary William Hague, as well as the current occupier of 10 Downing Street and his side-kick, also fall short.

              • palmtoptiger says:

                well, tbh, I don’t even know who the current occupier of 10 Downing Street is.. I decided a few years ago that those guys didnt really merit my attention. I remember Blair and Miliband best because Blair used to be on TV a lot when I still was in Germany and watched TV at least occasionally, and Miliband, well, because he became sort of famous in Russian media after his alleged derogatory tone towards Lavrov in a phone conversation, to which Lavrov (allegedly) responded “who are you to f***ing lecture me”. never independently confirmed, though, so may well be an urban myth.

    • marknesop says:

      Most of the comments thus far seem to be cheerfully supportive of a continued policy of shitting on Russia, which is instructive. Better bite the bullet, lads, and spend some of that austerity money to get those North Sea oil projects going. I don’t think too many realize what the energy picture is going to look like in two to three years.

  8. Moscow Exile says:

    Woe! Woe! From Muscovy I bring ye bad tidings!

    As from today, February 1st, 2015, the price of a Moscow metro ticket has increased 25% and costs 50 rubles.

    I have just checked out the following information:

    In London, England, when purchasing a single ticket for cash, in order to travel, for example, from Euston Station underground station to the next station south on the Northern Line, namely Warren St. underground station, it costs £4.80 – that is $7.23 or 500.40 rubles for a distance of about half a mile or approximately 800 metres. One can buy zone and period tickets, of course, which is a much cheaper way of using the system than buying single tickets. Nevertheless, I still suspect that the London Underground is probably the most expensive of such transportation systems in the world.

    In Moscow, to travel from any station anywhere in the Moscow metro system to any other station one-way costs as from today, February 1st, 2014, 50 rubles, namely £00.48 or $00.72.

    Average monthly income in Moscow is now about 50,000 rubles ($1,200).

    See: Salaries in Moscow Rise to $1,200 Per Month as Wage Growth Slows

    That’s from MT of course, which has to include the usual meme: …”Moscow — one of the world’s most expensive cities”.

    Well surely that depends on what one’s tastes are, and, of course, MT is directed towards a Western fat-cat readership.

    In my experience, very, very few Western businessmen here use the metro.

    And MT makes its point as regards the horrific expense of living here by stating in the article linked above that in Moscow “… a decent cup of coffee costs a good 200 rubles ($5)”, albeit that the vast majority of Muscovites seldom drink coffee, let alone in trendy coffee houses.

    As a matter of fact, I was invited to meet somebody (a big noise at the Bank of Russia) in a coffee house – one of a chain called “Coffee House” that the “elite” like to frequent – situated next door to the Moscow Tchaikovsky Conservatoire on Bolshaya Nikitskaya Street. The coffee that I drank there cost over 300 rubles.

    I did not pay – she did. The place was full of kreakly – I can spot them a mile off, especially when they are willing to pay such rip-off prices. My hostess, though, certainly does not fall into this category, although she is a lover of the classical arts and a great opera fan. She only invited me to meet here there because she lives nearby – behind the conservatoire, in fact.

    My monthly salary, by the way, is 60.000 rubles, and I travel free on the metro, as do all my children, because we are members of a multi-child family and have special passes.

    A family with three or more children is classed as “multi-child” here. Oh yes! And I travel free in any case because I am a pensioner – have been for almost a year now.

    • peter says:

    • peter says:

      • PvMikhail says:

        What is this obsession with Putin’s daughter? Do they want to abduct/rape/kill her to blackmail the whole nation or what? Get lost losers

        • Moscow Exile says:

          It’s because Navalny “outed” her.

          I suspect that someone thinks that the sun shines out of Navalny’s totally incorruptible arsehole.

          Vladimir Putin enemy ‘outs’ president’s mystery daughter

          • Moscow Exile says:

            Navalny got done for libel not long ago for tweeting that a local government official was a junky. He as fined $8,400.

            A municipal official, Alexei Lisovenko, had sued Navalny for calling him a “lawmaker-drug addict” in a tweet in April 2014. In court, Navalny’s lawyer insisted the judge had never established who posted this tweet, since both Navalny’s wife and his supporters have access to that Twitter account.

            It has also been claimed that many others have access to it as well.

            Navalny appealed and lost.

            Opposition leader Navalny’s sentence in libel case takes effect

            And he still continues to break the terms of his suspended sentences without suffering custodial punishment for doing so.

            Somebody must like him.

            • marknesop says:

              Takes a special kind of man to put his wife in the crosshairs too, so as to muddy the picture. Well played, Lyosha.

              I think, for what it’s worth, that the government doesn’t so much like him as value him as the unofficial (meaning loudest) leader of the opposition. If Navalny was locked up, the protest community might coalesce around an actual charismatic leader (who has not popped up yet, because I can’t think of anyone we’ve seen so far who would fit the bill) who might actually be a threat. Meanwhile, Navalny continues to show his ass by breaking the law and bragging about it, suggesting none too subtly that if he were given greater power, he would decide which laws should restrict his freedom to behave as he liked and which could be ignored…all the while prating and screaming about the rule of law. What he should really do is complete his sentence as handed down, with dignity and under protest as he sees fit, instead of chortling about his bad-boy reputation.

          • peter says:

            … Navalny “outed” her.

            No he didn’t, РБК and Kashin did.

            • Moscow Exile says:

              … Navalny “outed” her.

              No he didn’t, РБК and Kashin did.

              Have you not read the DailyTelegraph article linked above in which an agency report is published concerning Putin’s daughter, aka Yekaterina Tikhonova?

              The article states that Navalny published Yekaterina Putina’s pseudonym, in that he “on Thursday [29 January 2015] published on his Facebook page an online report which identified a certain Yekaterina Vladimirovna Tikhonova as the head of an organisation working with Moscow State University”.

              The article continues: “A separate report on Wednesday by RBC, an independent multi-media holding, stated Tikhonova was among those heading a $1.7 billion project to build new University facilities but it did not make any connection between her and Putin.
              Navalny wrote on his Facebook page: “RBC (they are cool!) yesterday found Putin’s daughter in the Scientific Council of Moscow State University”.

              On the same day that Navalny stated that Tikhonova and Putina were one and the same person, Kashin wrote in his blog:

              Биографические детали трех Катерин — Путиной, Тихоновой-танцорши и Тихоновой-ученой (она еще член Ученого совета МГУ, а вот тут можно понять, как связаны танцы и университет) соединяются в одну биографию, и да, это одна и та же женщина

              The biographical details of these three Katherines – Putina, Tikhonova the dancer and Tikhonova the academic (she is still a member of the Moscow State University Scientific Council, and you can see *here the connection between the dancing and the university) join together in one biography and, yes, they are one and the same woman

              *Summing up the trip, Katerina Tikhonova, Director of the Moscow State University National Intellectual Resource Centre stated

              • peter says:

                I am afraid you may be confused here.

                Навальный, January 29 at 9:10am

                Занятно.

                РБК (крутые!) вчера нашли дочку Путина в Научном совете МГУ. Я, вроде, их расследование внимательно прочёл, но даже внимания не обратил.

                Явно не я один, сегодня до всех дошло, когда Кашина почитали (линк).

                Короче, все молодцы: и РБК, и Кашин.

                Позор нам, читающим по диагонали.

                • Moscow Exile says:

                  So it seems that Kashin twigged Putin’s younger daughter’s identity and posted this at 3:32pm on January 28, stating the connection between Katerina Putina’s maternal grandmother’s patronymic, Tikhonovna, and the pseudonym Tikhonova:

                  Член ученого совета МГУ и чемпионка по акробатическому рок-н-роллу Катерина Владимировна Тихонова 31.08.1986 рождения – псевдоним, видимо, в честь бабушки Екатерины Тихоновны Шкребневой.

                  Member of Moscow State University Scientific Council and acrobatic Rock ‘n’ Roll dancing champion Katerina Vladimirovna Tikhonova (born 31.08.1986) has an obvious pseudonym, made in honour of her grandmother Yekaterina Tikhonovna Shkrebnevaya.

                  I am confused with this, though:

                  Timed January 29 at 12:10am

                  When is 12:10am?

                  In that posting, Navalny praises RBC for revealing Tikhonova’s true identity:

                  РБК (крутые!) вчера нашли дочку Путина в Научном совете МГУ.

                  RBC (sound fellows!) yesterday identified Putin’s daughter on the Moscow State University Scientific Council … in short: well done both RBC and Kashin

                  However, in the link provided by Navalny to the RBC article, which article, he says, identifies Putin’s daughter as a member of the MSU Scientific Council, there is no connection made between Tikhonova and Katerina Putina, which is what the Daily Telegraph also says about that same article: not once does the article say that Tikhonova is really Putin’s daughter. Navalny, however, congratulates RBC for making this revelation.

                  On the same day, namely January 29, 2015, there was this off Navalny:

                  Timed January 29 at 2:59am

                  Here, apparently posted in the dead of night, 2 hours and 59 minutes into January 29, 2014, Navalny states that Kashin has identified Tikhanova as Katerina Putina, which he indeed had done on that very same day in his online blog, and which he had also done on the previous day on Facebook,timed at 15:32.

                  The RBC article, which Navalny praises on January 29 at 12:10am (again – when is 12:10 am?) for its revelation, was posted on January 28th at 15:01. The article does not identify Tikhonova with Katerina Putina: the only place where Putin’s and Tikhonova’s names are mentioned in the same sentence in that RBC article is at the very end, where it reads:

                  … в январе 2015 года Тихонова в обществе Кирилла Шамалова (заместитель председателя правления «Сибура» по взаимодействию с органами власти, владелец 21,3%-го пакета акций «Сибура» и сын петербургского знакомого Владимира Путина, акционера банка «Россия» Николая Шамалова) посетила «российскую сессию» Давосского форума в Швейцарии.

                  … in January 2015, Tikhonova in the company of Kirill Shamalov (deputy chairman of the board of SIBUR engaged in liaising with the government authorities, owner of 23% of SIBUR shares, son of one of Vladimir Putin’s Petersburg acquaintances, Nikolai Shamalov, and “Rossiya Bank” shareholder) visited the “Russian session” of the Davos Forum in Switzerland.

                  So in answer to the question who “outed” Putina/Tikhonova first, it seems that Kashin is your man.

                  Sequence of events

                  1. RBS article: no Putina/Tikhonova connection made; published on January 28th at 3.01 pm

                  Thirty-one minutes later:

                  2. Facebook: Kashin “outs” Putina, January 28, at 3:32 pm

                  Then on January 29:

                  3. Facebook: Navalny congratulates Kashin and RBS for “outing” Putina. Time – 12-10 am [Again, when is 12:10 am ???? Ten minutes past midnight for me is 00:10. Is that what 12:10 am means? Ten minutes pat midday is for me 12:10 or 12:10 pm.]

                  and:
                  .
                  4. Kashin’s blog: “outs” Putina before 02:59, January 29, namely before Navalny posts the following Facebook entry:

                  5. Facebook: Navalny reports Kashin’s blog “outing” of Putina at 2:59 am. Kashin’s blog simply has a posting date of January 29, no time given. Navalny, howevever must have seen it before 02:59, January 29.

                  Judging by the timing of their 29 January revelations online and on Facebook concerning Tikhonova’s identity, Kashin and Navalny respectively seem to have been in cahoots. It seems however, that Navalny jumped the gun as regards the RBS article and wrongly supposed that it had revealed Tikhonova’s true identity.

                  The article, in fact, was hinting at the very strong connections Tikhonova had with certain parties, one of whom being the son of one of Putin’s friends (nudge, nudge; wink,wink!) and after this article had appeared, Kashin, knowing that one of Putin’s daughters is called Katerina and knowing that Tikhonova’s patronymic was the same as that of Putin’s daughters, having found out and correlated Katerina Vladimirovna Tikhonova’s and Katerina Vladimirovna Putina’s birthdates and found out that the patronymic of one of the latter’s grandmothers was Tikhonovna, he put 2 and 2 together and – bingo!

              • Moscow Exile says:

                Navalny posted his Facebook revelation of Tikhonova’s identity at 02:59, January 29, 2015.

                Kashin’s online blog revealing Tikhonova’s identity also appeared on January 29, 2015 – no time given.

                RBC treported Tikhonova’s activity on January 28, 2015, but according to the agency article in the Telegraph “it did not make any connection between her and Putin”.

                So Kashin’s blog article appeared before 02:59, January 29, whereupon Navalny posted this news on Facebook at 02:59.

                Did Navalny just come across Kashin’s revelation whilst surfing after midnight, January 28/29, or had Kashin given Navalny the nod?

                Whatever, Navalny’s posting of Tikhonova’s true identity on Facebook would have been, I should imagine, far more effective an “outing” than any revelation that Kashin made on his blog between 00:00 and 02:59 hours on the same day.

                So who should be awarded the laurels for “outing” Yekaterina Putina – Kashin or Navalny?

                Seems like a joint award would be more fitting.

          • marknesop says:

            Is he Vladimir Putin’s Number One Enemy this week, or does Browder have it for February? Or is it Khodorkovsky? It’s so hard to keep up.

        • kirill says:

          I agree 100%. Putin’s daughter has nothing to do with politics or economics. She has a right to privacy. Peter the pedo is derailing the discussions on this board.

          • patient observer says:

            I thought Putin’s daughter was in the US studying economics at Harvard. What a relief! She looks nice, obviously very athletic and talented. If she is Putin’s daughter, he is surely proud. I much prefer the way Russian politicians shy away from exploiting their families for photo ops. Michele Obama is particularly grating but of course no human, subhuman, superhuman or android can outgrate H. R Clinton.

            • james says:

              peter wants to turn ks into the national enquirer.. it fits with his mindset.

              • yalensis says:

                That is an ad hominem attack against our darling Peter – ha ha! just kidding!

              • patient observer says:

                Yes, he does have an obsession with gossip columnists or their modern day equivalents – twitterists. Can any form of communications be more banal that twitter?

                • yalensis says:

                  In a word: Yes.
                  Writing and drawing graffiti on the stalls of public toilets!

                • james says:

                  i agree with yalensis.. twitter-john must have been invented for similar folks though.. hey lookie here what so and so scribbled on the wall in the twitter-john.. whoopie, lol..

        • yalensis says:

          Whether she is Putin’s daughter or not, these people could be placing this charming young girl’s life in danger by “outing” her. They really shouldn’t do that.

          • Fern says:

            The US/UK/NATO have gone after the children of ‘official’ enemies in the past. Members of Gaddafi’s family were killed in air raids while the homes of Saddam Hussein’s daughters were similarly targeted. One of Putin’s daughters was ‘outed’ while living in the Netherlands resulting in Ukrainians living there threatening to protest her residence there 24/7. So yes, removing anonymity from both these young women puts them at risk – something that those striving to do just that must be aware of.

    • Jen says:

      Why is there this need for Oleg Kashin and Alexei Navalny to fuss over Ekaterina Tikhonova’s identity? It only demonstrates how irrelevant they have become in Russian politics, that they need to obsess over something that would interest only The Daily Mail’s celebrity reporting unit and The Guardian’s Moscow correspondent.

      Plenty of people who are the offspring of famous politicians, actors, writers, musicians, etc use their mothers’ maiden names, grandparents’ surnames or some other made-up names instead of the ones they were born with. This is so people don’t think they are getting help from their celebrity parents. About half of Hollywood and a good proportion of the music industry swan about with names other than the ones they were born with. The way Peter brings up this topic with Tweets from Julia Ioffe and others is to suggest that Tikhonova is involved in some skulduggery or infiltration on behalf of the Kremlin ath Moscow State University.

      Peter should find something more interesting like photos of Vladimir Putin and Alla Kabaeva’s baby, if any exist. Navalny should have details of the hospital where it was born and the baby’s birth certificate.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        The RBS article linked above does, in fact, go into a long and detailed analysis of the proposed extension of MSU facilities on the land (more like a wasteland it often appears to me) behind of its MSU campus, giving the names of all parties involved. Tikhonova’s name only pops up towards the end of the article. She is a member of the MSU Scientific Council and also a star acrobatic rock ‘n’ roller in the university dancing team, or whatever, and</b< (nudge-nudge, wink-wink!) was at Davos a couple of weeks ago with the son of one of the Evil One's Petersburg pals.

        RBS is playing it safe. The bog-wall scribblers, though, Kashin and Navalny, launch into action – Kashin a mere 30 minutes after the appearance online of the RBS article on 28 January, links Tikhonova with Putina and scribbles what he thinks on his Facebook shithouse wall.

        On his own shithouse wall and shortly after midnight the following day, Navalny posts congratulations to Kashin for making his stunning revalation.

        Kashin meanwhile posts his revelation in his own blog on 29 January sometime after midnight and before 3 o'clock in the morning, for at a few minutes before 3 am on 29 January, Navalny again writes on his shithouse wall congratulations to Kashin on his blog article, enclosing with this congratulatory shithouse wall message a picture of rock 'n' roller Putina/Tikhonova that he had copied and pasted from Kashin's blog.

        A busy night in the social network crappers.

  9. Moscow Exile says:

    British journalism at its best:

    President Putin is a dangerous psychopath – reason is not going to work with him
    A secret war in Ukraine, murder in London, incursions into others’ airspace. His behaviour is getting worse

    Nato’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, singled out Russia’s military ambitions in a speech on Friday, describing 2014 as “a black year” for European security. He revealed that the alliance recorded more than 400 incursions into foreign airspace by Russian warplanes last year, around four times as many as in 2013.

    Most of the readers’ comments lambaste the article.

    Two regular russophobes pop up, though.

    • Moscow Exile says:

      One russophobe comes out with the accusatory statement to commenters that ridicule the article: “You Russians pretending to be British, love it”, which is highly ironic, considering the ownership of that rag in which the above article appears.

      • marknesop says:

        That’s funny, because it is the oligarchs who have taken their lovely wealth out of Russia and fled with it to London, where they have bought themselves proper newspapers and other gentlemen’s business ventures and grown even richer, who inspire respect and reverence in kreakly like Bershidsky. Their having selected a foreign country to live in is a measure of their taste and refinement, and automatically bestows upon them a benevolence that makes them love their fellow man and want to spread their money around generously. Whereas filthy Russian oligarchs who remain in Russia are thieves who stole the people’s money and now roll about in their pigsty palaces surrounded by their ill-gotten gains.

        • peter says:

          … it is the oligarchs who… fled… to London… who inspire respect and reverence in kreakly like Bershidsky.

          I am afraid you may be barking up the wrong tree.

          Bershidsky on Berezovsky.

          • marknesop says:

            Possibly; I’ve never spoken with Bershidsky in person, although I admire his writing. I based that assessment on his faith that Abramovich would “do something nice” for Chukotka, which to the very best of my knowledge he never did – unfortunately a characteristic of the oligarchy, if broad experience is any standard of measure, and including those I already cited. You could point out that’s just one example of Bershidsky’s possible thinking. But so is yours. So if you can cite other Bershidsky articles excoriating foreign-based Russian oligarchs, you would have a pretty good case. Meanwhile, I found the linked article treats Berezovsky with a good deal of compassion, like a loveable uncle who happens to be in the Mafia, and pans his business skills while he was still an oligarch in Russia. It’s quite true he has nothing much that is good to say about his business skills after he moved away, either. But he paints Berezovsky as a crude but likeable rogue, and seems to suggest there was no real malice in him in a pathetic manner which almost makes you feel sorry for Berezovsky.

            But if your point was that Bershidsky is a free-thinker who has a variety of opinions, I would agree, and the more I read by him the more grudging admiration I feel for him. We are on opposite sides of the political spectrum on most issues – I suspect, although I don’t know his opinions on everything – but it’s hard to dislike him.

            • peter says:

              I based that assessment on his faith that Abramovich would “do something nice” for Chukotka…

              “One hopes Abramovich is not without his share of decency…” – doesn’t sound like a lot of faith, more like a sneer.

              Meanwhile, I found the linked article treats Berezovsky with a good deal of compassion…

              This article is an obituary of sorts (published four days after Berezovsky died). You don’t write “собаке собачья смерть” in an obituary, do you?

              • marknesop says:

                Maybe; largely a matter of perception. I did not interpret the article on Abramovich as being in any way sneering, which would have been very unlikely to have achieved the objective, which was beneficial initiatives for Chukotka. As far as Berezovsky goes, it’s true he was not complimentary – equally true that there might have been a no-speaking-ill-of-the-dead barrier – but I did not get any of the smoldering anger he exhibits against the government. And his article, “No Illusions Left, I’m Leaving Russia” makes no mention of his leaving owing to disappointment in the Russian oligarchs. Instead, his litany of complaints is the usual liberal blubbering; no freedom of the press, no rule of law, bla bla.

    • Most of the comments on that piece of crap were surprisingly making fun of the author and her propaganda. It just clarifies my opinion that most of the Brits and Americans are not anti-Russian, only their governments and mass media are.

      Unfortunately the same cannot be said about Finns. Write an article like that in Finland and most of the user comments would be supportive and agreeing with the author.

    • marknesop says:

      Everyone knows the saying about people who fail to learn the lessons of history being condemned to repeat it. It’s a slight misquotation, but the idea that we should be able to avoid making the same mistakes by studying the past is undeniably attractive.”

      She demurs over a slight misquotation, when everything in the headline is a lie. Yes, you’re right, England – Putin is a dangerous psychopath. So do something about it, instead of whining. Go to war with Russia, why don’t you?

    • yalensis says:

      I laughed out loud at this comment – I assume it is just “tit for tat” B.S., but you never know!

      Obama, according to the local College Psychologists, is a very sick person, with multiple Pathological Disorders.
      According to these same Psychologists, Obama is extremely Narcissistic, (much like Hitler.), and he is seriously Paranoid, with tendencies of ‘God like Power’. His Psychosis is very serious!

  10. Moscow Exile says:

    Strange weather here this morning. Thunderstorm and heavy hail. The temperature has suddenly risen 10 degrees Celsius above the seasonal average to +2C (35.6F). It is the warmest !st February since February 1st 1914. Minus 8C (17.6F) forecast for tonight, though, and minus 5C (23F) maximum tomorrow and minus 11C (12.2F) on Tuesday with snow throughout the week.

  11. yalensis says:

    Dear Mark:
    Excellent blogpost.
    Is very true that the kreakly adore the oligarchs. I guess they believe they are the “Michaelangelos” to the oligarchs Lorenzo de Medici.

    • marknesop says:

      Well put – indeed, they seem to yearn for the Russia of Alexander and Bolkonsky and Kurigan, where the elite pursued an energetic social scene of balls and parties and were very much in the forefront of influencing policy, while the peasantry laboured on the estates of the gentry. It is little wonder the term “feudal system” is tossed around with increasing frequency.

  12. et Al says:

    Dear Mark, you should expand into musical satire and have your own show. There’s plenty of space along side Stephen Colbert, Jon Snow and others. Us regular commenters on your blog could be your backing singers, known as the ‘Bad Habits’.

    On the meat of the subject, I’d just like to repeat a comment often made by one of us fairly regularly, i.e. with the quality of such Putin enemies, there really is nothing to fear at all. They are all out in the open, they mostly come across as either or nuts, anti-democratic elitists, snobs, bigots and racists, gigantic hypocrites and bereft of being able to make a cogent argument based on fact rather than long-winded political rhetoric. That they are so elevated by the Pork Pie News Network reflects the desperation of the West of finally having come up against a brick wall (Russia) and Putin calling them in for their lies and hypocrisy.

    It’s been a while since I’ve banged on about the five stages of grief here and there is not much to say except that there does not seem to be much progress beyond step one (denial) for most though I do see signs of all points, though not in one place. It seems that step two (acceptance) has taken a grip as there is finally some recognition in the West that their sanctions cannot change Russian policy and they don’t want to pay for the Ukraine they are currently destroying, so the sanctions are still extremely soft (compared to what they could have done) because they are hoping that in some grand bargain they can still get Russia to pick up most of the tab. That last bit is still denial.

    1. Denial and Isolation
    2. Anger
    3. Bargaining
    4. Depression
    5. Acceptance

    Before I forget, here apparently is proof of Russian weapons supplies to eastern Ukraine, found via a link on the Kyiv Post.

    Business Insider: These Are The Weapons That Russia Is Pouring Into Eastern Ukraine
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/weapons-russia-is-pouring-into-east-ukraine-2015-1?op=1
    As Russian military supplies continue to enter Ukraine, it becomes harder by the day for Putin to deny that Moscow is providing arms to the separatists. …

    …In November, the Armament Research Services has released their third report http://armamentresearch.com/Uploads/Research%20Report%20No.%203%20-%20Raising%20Red%20Flags.pdf on the arms and munitions being used by both the Ukrainian government and the rebels in the ongoing conflict. Complete with photographic evidence, it is clear that Moscow has been covertly supplying an assortment of older Soviet weaponry along with recently introduced Russian equipment to the separatists. ..
    ####

    I had a quick look through (not that I’m any kind of weapons expert) and the evidence they present is sparse and qualified, nothing to substantiatie that large amounts of Russian arms are going in to east Ukraine (though does that really matter?). Any war zone, particularly a civil war is notorious for business dealings where all kinds of weapons turn up via third parties or are even sold from one side to the other.

    Curiously, how is it that this report made in november 2014 hasn’t been more widely circulated by the PPNN as proof of Russian involvement? Incompetence? Laziness? Or is it simply just too thin to be credible to back the amazing reports by the PPNNs?

    Then we have the other weapons resource, namely http://www.lostarmour.info/ which logs and documents all captured Ukranian army/fascist materiel. I wonder how much of the stuff from the november report turns up there.

    • et Al says:

      Maybe I should point out the obvious about sanctions against Russia and other things that are hitting the economy such as the low oil price and the effect of the EU economic recession dragging on, i.e. if the West still expects Russia to pony up for Ukraine in some deal, that is hardly going to happen if there is no money left. Do they imagine that Russia would subsidize the Ukraine instead of supporting the Russian citizens?

      It’s just the fat kid in a sweet shop syndrome no less.

    • marknesop says:

      Ha, ha!! Thanks for the online songwriting idea, and “The Bad Habits” is indeed a catchy name. You will, of course, have to dress as nuns; it was preordained.

      Dear God. Must we go through this again? Let’s start with the photo at the top. There can be no purpose for including it other than to imply the separatists are getting mobile air-defense systems from Russia, although they do not come right out and say it.

      Look familiar? It’s from the page, “Equipment of the Ukrainian Ground Forces”. Look, I think we need a rule here: if the system in question is one used by Ukrainian forces, and the separatists end up with it, don’t even try “it came from Russia” unless you can provide full documentation and are willing to do so. Especially since there are ample occurrences of Ukrainian troops getting “cauldroned” or abandoning their equipment and fleeing, or defecting with their equipment. We should also stipulate up front that General Ben Hodges is just about as full of shit as if he had had it driven into him with a hydraulic ram. Only last November he reported ominously that Russia was able to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. This, like other NATO propaganda, must have been calculated to imply they were going to do it – otherwise it is merely a bald statement recognizing the size and capability of the armed forces of the Russian Federation, which everyone knew already. He intoned solemnly “The Russians have all of the necessary resources. I cannot draw any conclusions about their intentions on the basis of my data, but they have demonstrated the ability to do this and located their military hardware for this plan to be realized“. He could not divine anything of their intentions from where their equipment was located (meaning across the border from Ukraine, somewhere), but now he knows for a certainly that Russian equipment within Ukraine has doubled?

      The west would be flooding Ukraine with artillery pieces and armor if it thought that would help them win – but they know it won’t. As others have pointed out here before, Ukraine is not losing because of a deficiency of armor and artillery; it was a net weapons exporter before the war, and has plenty of equipment. It lacks manpower, and current efforts toward mobilizations are a tragic picture of the law of diminishing returns. The only solution, armor-wise, would be for NATO to supply both armor and artillery, and soldiers to man it, at which point it could simply take over the war and win it for Ukraine. I can’t think of a better way for a junta government to lose the last shred of legitimacy. Plus the very real risk that it would escalate into a major land war in Ukraine between Russia and NATO, which would carry its own inherent risk of spinning out of control and into a nuclear exchange. The west knows Ukraine must win this one itself, or create the appearance of having done so. And so far, results in that direction have been several notches south of dismal.

      1. Self-loading rifles. No such thing; what, you put the ammo on the table, and it fills its own magazine? I’m sure what they mean is “automatic”, in the sense that the recoil from the round being fired chambers the next round for firing, such as the AK-47 has done since 1946. Nobody except the Middle-Easterners fires it that way, and not even they do it in combat, only in celebration, because the weapon is almost uncontrollable on full auto. But this is a red herring, because state forces far outnumber the separatists, so there is no excuse for junta troops getting their asses kicked regardless who has what rifles. Besides, the USA is supplying Kiev’s forces with modern assault rifles, the Israeli Weapon Industries Tavor.

      “In one case, a separatist was documented using VSS rifles”. So? The VSS Vintorez has been around since the early 90’s at least, and has had plenty of time to make its way to Ukraine. Some sites would have you believe it is unique to SPETSNAZ, but in fact Ukraine is a registered user.

      2. Light Machine Guns. The RPK-74 has been around since 1974, when it was in broad use by the Soviet Union. The PKP has only been around since 2001, but saw service in both the Chechen Wars and the 2008 war in Georgia; Georgian troops are known to be fighting on the Ukrainian side. Same argument applies – the war is not being won or lost on who has the most light machine guns, so long as one man can only fire one of them at a time.

      3. Shotguns, hunting rifles and handguns – give me a break. Such bullshit. The notion that the separatists are being saved from being properly brought to heel by the state through a stream of shotguns and hunting rifles pouring in from Russia should make the authors blush with shame, when Ukrainian troops shell Donetsk day and night from more than 10 km away. Know any handguns that you could use to pick off a man at 10 km? I’d sure like to see it.

      In summary, desperate and humiliating effort. Nice try.

      • kat kan says:

        NAF are picking up trophies all the time. The latest batch, at Nikishino, took them two whole days to cart away in a shuttle service with 3 trucks. The gear included NATO style arms and ammunition (guns, rockerts etc) which has also been found at other locations lately. So when they are next photographed using some of this, will someone scream “Germany arming the rebels”?? Poland? Turkey? USA? and they were supposed to only be giving non-lethal aid, weren’t they?

        One non-lethal item was some nice-looking high power radio kit. NAF now has ears all over.

      • et Al says:

        Which explains precisely why the November report got no traction.

        Maybe it should be DJ ‘C’ & the Bad Habits? I don’t know what your singing voice is like but being a DJ would be infinitely more cool. I suggest that colliemum’s collie plays drums as an homage to Animal from Dr. Mayhem & the Electric Teeth. If she objects, then the collie could play the piano like Rolf.

        I can easily spend a whole day on youtube simply watching the Muppet songs…

  13. peter says:

    • PaulR says:

      The weird thing is that I am a member of ASEES but never heard of this until I read about it on this blog! Another reason to keep reading these comments.

    • james says:

      thanks for sharing that.. i found the article enlightening and the comments at the bottom much the same.

    • yalensis says:

      (1) There is a ominous kind of McCarthyism brewing against Stephen Cohen, in American academia.
      (2) ASEEES is a CIA-infested cesspool.

      I read somewhere (can’t find the link any more) that at the 1991 annual ASEEES convention (which in those days was named, quite appropriately AAASS), the keynote speaker stood up and announced to the gathered “scholars”: “It’s over! We WON the Cold War.”

      Thus implicitly admitting, that a large portion, at least, of their “scholarly research” was just partisan anti-Soviet B.S.

  14. peter says:

  15. Warren says:

    Published on 27 Jan 2015
    Anne Applebaum, Journalist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author and
    Director of the Transitions Forum, Legatum Institute (Moderator), Journalists and authors, Oliver Bullough and Peter Pomerantsev
    as well as Jerzy Pomianowski, Executive Director of EED (Welcome words).

    Corruption has defeated governments of all stripes in countries across the former communist world. As the people of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova struggle to rebuild their states, what is the contribution the West can make?

    • et Al says:

      I raise you by this:

      Al Beeb al s’Allah GONAD (God’s Offical news Agency Direct): In the Balance – In the Balance – Ukraine, Russia and the Sanctions Debate
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02hl72v
      As 30 die in Mariupol we ask will punishing Russia with sanctions bring an end to the attacks in eastern Ukraine? Or, is the West misunderstanding the extent of Putin’s resolve in the region? And in the end, how much money will the West have to spend to underpin the indebted Ukrainian economy? Sir Rodric Braithwaite, former UK Ambassador to Russia, Michael Calvey senior partner with Baring Vostok one of the biggest firms investing into Russia, Philippa ‘Pippa’ Malmgren one time special assistant on Economic Policy on the National Economic Council in the Bush administration and currently founder of DRPM Group and Erik Berglöf the former chief economist of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development consider the direction of travel for policy, and the stability it might deliver for the people of Ukraine and Russia?

      • Warren says:

        Not a bad debate, refreshingly objective and informative discussion. I especially enjoyed Pippa Malmgren’s contribution. Rodric Braithwaite always a voice of reason when discussing Russia.

    • marknesop says:

      He looks terribly worried. Not.

      • colliemum says:

        That’s surely unforgivable, him not looking properly worried …!

        Btw – can anybody think of any Western PM/President who has such nice sense of the ridiculous and gives way to it on camera? Like that piece in Austria someone linked to on the previous thread, or the one where Putin burst out laughing in that heavy-duty German TV interview last year (can’t find the link, I’m sure you remember it)?
        I can’t …

  16. et Al says:

    This is something new though. Please forgive me for posting the source!

    Daily Extremist: Intercepted Russian bomber was carrying a nuclear missile over the Channel
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/555454/Intercepted-Russian-bomber-was-carrying-a-nuclear-missile-over-the-Channel
    A RUSSIAN bomber intercepted over the Channel last week was carrying a nuclear missile designed to destroy Trident submarines, it emerged last night…

    …Sources within the Ministry of Defence last night revealed that one of the two long-range bombers was carrying at least one air-dropped “seek and find”d nuclear warhead-carrtying missile, designed to seek and destroy a Vanguard submarine.

    Both Prime Minister David Cameron and Defence Secretary Michael Fallon were alerted after cockpit conservations confirming the bomber’s nuclear payload were intercepted by a Norwegian military listening post, and shared with the Ministry of Defence.

    The missile was not armed, and the aircraft’s crew would have required a direct order from President Putin before making it live.

    The other bomber was said to have been acting in the role of “mothership”, overseeing the military exercise.

    One senior RAF source said: “We downloaded conversations from the crew of one plane who used a special word which meant the would-be attack was a training exercise.

    “They know that we can pick up their transmissions and it would only be of concern if the often used release weapon order was changed.

    “We also knew from another source that one of the aircraft was carrying a nuclear weapon long before it came anywhere near UK airspace.”..

    “This continual and increasing probing of Nato airspace by these nuclear bombers and fighter aircraft, tankers and electronic aircraft by Russian is a pattern of increased pressure by Russia designed to remind the West and Nato that they remain a large nuclear power, and a serious military power with reach,” said Justin Bronk of the Royal United Services Institute, last night.

    “Russia now clearly perceives Nato not as a potential threat, but as an adversary...

    …Air Cmdre Andrew Lambert, of the UK National Defence Association and formerly a leading air power strategist, said: “Putin is making the point that he has nuclear weapons and will carry them wherever he wants and Nato just has to take it…

    ####
    The words ‘tough titties’ spring to mind. If NATO wishes to rub up against the Bear intentionally then don’t be surprised if the Bear presents a claw or fang or two every now and then. Duh!

    I’m also amazed by the stunning insight and analysis that the wonk from RUSI has. After all, all he had to do was listen to Russia when they said “We now see NATO as a direct military threat to Russia”. Maybe he doesn’t know any Russian? Even the Germans need a think tank to translate in to German the Russian’s saying publicly NO MORE. When will it ever end and when will someone offer me such a job for doing sweet FA?

    I wonder if there is any way to determine whether a bomber is carrying an actual nuclear weapon in its belly? I’m sure that there is but it would have to be highly specialized equipment and probably not carried in a fighter jet unless it was podded and the data downlinked.

    I love the accompanying l montage with a Picture of Putin in front of the bomber, just in case you didn’t know who Putin was… One might get the impression that he was personally flying it.

    • palmtoptiger says:

      > I wonder if there is any way to determine whether a bomber is carrying an actual nuclear
      > weapon in its belly?

      at first glance, I didn’t think there was any reliable technical way of doing it. a nuclear warhead isnt all that different from a regular warhead except for some minute gamma radiation which is practically entirely shielded by the metal case. with a highly sensitive Geiger detector in its immediate vicinity (several meters) you can probably measure a slight increase in background radiation. but it’s likely impossible to do from another plane some hundred meters away from the bomber carryng the warhead in question.

      the question got me curious though and I searched a little. the first thing I found was this US paper on it https://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/pdf/1_3-4FetterB.pdf which largely confirmed my initial guess – gamma rays being way to go, but highly unreliable, easily shielded, not working well with U fissile materials, and any potential detection devices with a radius of a few meters, at best.

      I searched some more and found another Russian paper which is more intriguing – a helium-3 based neutron detector http://scienceandglobalsecurity.org/archive/sgs01belyaev.pdf. this looked like it might actually work and, as it turns out, in late-Perestroika era joint naval exercises, a Soviet heli equipped with this system apparently was able to detect nuclear warheads aboard US ships with a relatively high degree of certainty from as far as 75 meters away.

      given that that was 25 years ago and the system has likely since been developed further, the conclusion would have to be that yes, it’s possible.

      • marknesop says:

        It would be possible on takeoff if the weapon were one of those designed for that vintage bomber, because they are carried externally. But it’s hard to imagine any of those still exist, and even harder to imagine why they would carry it openly, since the propellant in the missile would have expired more than a decade ago. It could be refurbished, but why? Those vintage missiles were retired because it was assessed they would likely fall victim to the air defenses of the day – what about now? And the clownlike suggestion that a bomber could carry a nuclear missile designed to target submerged submarines just makes it sound as if it were written for The Onion or a similar satire publication.

        • palmtoptiger says:

          good points. I mainly tried to tackle the question from a purely theoretical point of view. in reality it’s highly unlikely they actually did any detection at all. in all likelihood, they just wrote up some random BS out of thin air, as usual.

    • marknesop says:

      Jaw-droppingly mendacious from start to finish. It would be entirely conceivable for Britain to be aware of the bomber (which is a TU-95 Bear) carrying a nuclear missile while it was still outside British airspace – where it in fact remained throughout its flight – because the missiles it was designed to carry are enormous, and not carried internally but on release stations on the belly of the aircraft; the AS-3 and the AS-4, both nukes. However, the production of the former was terminated in the late 60’s and its use abandoned in the late 70’s. The latter, too, was developed in the 1960’s. I suppose it is possible one or two could still be around, but what are the chances? Ukraine had more than 400 of them, and destroyed them all when their carriers were scrapped. Would you want to fly with a nuclear missile that had been around – decaying slowly – since at least the 70’s?

      Both were designed for use against U.S. Carrier Battle Groups, with a secondary role against land targets. The very idea of an anti-submarine nuclear missile launched from a bomber and designed for use against a submerged British submarine is frankly so ridiculous I can’t quite grasp what would make anyone commit to print with it. It goes a long way toward explaining the drastic difference between how the Royal Navy is regarded now compared with how it was regarded twenty years ago. Not that it’s their fault that journalists so frequently have room-temperature IQ’s, but it is they who are making the navy a laughingstock. Who would believe that, honestly? How would the bomber know where the submarine was? Dipping helicopters, relaying targeting information to the bomber? Who wants to stay around in a helicopter while a bomber launches a nuclear missile at the sub it is helpfully tracking? What does the bomber use for missile guidance? Against a submerged submarine whose depth is unknown, and which it cannot see on its own sensors? With a missile designed in the 1060’s which was purpose-built for use against aircraft carriers?

      What the hell are they smoking in Britain’s newsrooms? The story could not be any more wacky if they had said the missile was specifically designed to pick Dave Cameron out of a crowd and slay only him. But was designed for that role when he was still pissing his diddies, because he was born in 1966. Leave it to the clever Russians to suss out that Baby Cameron would one day be a terrible threat. Much the same way they designed a nuclear missile in the 1960’s to be used against a submarine that first kissed seawater in the 1990’s. Strewth: that’s all I can say.

      The Bear was also modified to carry one other weapon that might have done the trick – Tsar Bomba, the most powerful nuclear weapon ever detonated, a lithium bomb with a yield of 58 megatons. That would likely take out a submarine by the admittedly coarse method of removing all the water right to the bottom of the ocean in the area in which it was dropped. Unfortunately for the loony narrative of the glue-huffing Express bullpen, only one was ever built and it was expended in the test which probably terrified the living shit out of even its designers.

      • kat kan says:

        Here in Sydney they fly along all the beaches every day in summer, to spot underwater sharks lurking near beaches. So, the bomber could fly along and SEE the submarine, right? and then drop the nuke as a sort of super depth charge? I am sure a much cheaper conventional bomb would probably do the same job,but who looks at expense in something as important as national security?

        • marknesop says:

          They may be seeing the submarine if the water is shallow enough – which it is not in the English Channel – or they might have been able to pick it up on the Magnetic Anomaly Detector, that big spike which stuck out below the tail stabilizers on ASW aircraft and which detected large ferrous objects against the background of the earth’s magnetic field. That’s an ancient technology now, but there might be one or two still left around. Aircraft are definitely capable of finding submarines while airborne. Which leaves the messy problem of delivery – how are you going to drop a nuke (and remember they definitely said it was a missile, not a bomb) on a moving submarine from a moving aircraft so you don’t get ripped out of the sky yourself? A suicide mission? I don’t think so.

          In order to establish a submarine’s depth – and if you didn’t know that, you couldn’t be sure of getting it – you need to be in direct contact, which means active sonar. Impossible in a bomber. A helicopter, dipping near the surface, could do it for you. But how’s he going to get away once you release the weapon?

          A missile is guided; a bomb is not. A missile either emits its own tracking/homing signal, or the bomber has direct acquisition of the target and tracks both target and missile, steering the missile to intercept. A bomber cannot do that through the water. A missile cannot do that at all, as there are none which have both radar and sonar – the notion makes as much sense as attacking a passing aircraft with a torpedo. The whole idea is just embarrassingly ridiculous, and if I ran that paper all its reporters would be going to and from work in their underwear for a whole week as punishment for letting that howler make it to print, and the editor would be publicly caned by native Singaporean experts.

      • et Al says:

        The Russians have developed new nuclear armed cruise missiles the KH-102 and the non-conventional version KH-101* & KH-555 and old KH-55s. Apparently only the latter two will fit in a Tu-95MS bombay as the other ones are a meter or so longer, but not a problem for the Tu-160. I find it a bit odd that there isn’t an internal nuke version though. Maybe there is…

        * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-55_%28missile_family%29

        “Kh-101/102 (Izdeliye 111) – developed as a very stealthy replacement for the Kh-55SM in the late 1980s, the Kh-101 has a conventional warhead and the Kh-102 is nuclear.[3] A propfan version with 5000 km range was cancelled in 2000.[3] Accuracy is reportedly 6–9 m.[6] Speeds reach over 800km per her hour. Estimates range that it will outnumber the Russian nuclear missile fleet by 5:1, making them some of the most numerous and effective cruise missiles in the world.[6] They are expected to be in service in those numbers by 2023. The new missile complex has been successfully tested and in recent years put into series production to equip modernized Tu-95MS bombers.
        Kh-65SE – tactical version announced in 1992 with 410 kg conventional warhead and restricted to the 600 km range[5] limit of the INF treaty.”

        “The Kh-55 can be carried by the Tupolev Tu-95MS (‘Bear-H’)[5] and Tu-142M (‘Bear-F’),[5] and the Kh-55SM is carried by the Tupolev Tu-160 (‘Blackjack’).[5] Sixteen Kh-55’s can be carried by the Tu-95MS16 (Tu-95MSM) variant, ten on underwing pylons and six on a MKU-5-6 rotary launcher.[1”

  17. ThatJ says:

    The Curse of Victimhood and Negative Identity

    Days and months of atonement keep accumulating on the European wall calendar. The days of atonement however, other than commemorating the dead, often function as a tool in boosting political legitimacy of a nation – often at the expense of another nearby nation struggling for its identity.

    While the media keep reassuring us that history is crawling to an end, what we are witnessing instead is a sudden surge of new historical victimhoods, particularly among the peoples of Eastern Europe. As a rule, each individual victimhood requires a forever expanding number of its own dead within the context of unavoidable lurking fascist demons.

    Expressed in the postmodern lingo of today, the modern media-made image trivializes the real death and dying into an image of a hyperreal and surreal non-event. For instance, the historical consciousness of Serbs vs. Croats, Poles vs. Germans, not to mention the victimological memories of the mutually embattled Ukrainian and Russian nationalists today, are becoming more “historical” than their previously recorded respective histories.

    It seems that European nationalists do not fight any longer for their living co-ethnics, but primarily for their dead. As a result, as Efraim Zuroff correctly stated, “in post-Communist eastern Europe, [they’re] trying to play down the crimes of the Nazi cooperators and claim that the crimes of the Communists were just as bad.” (AS,” Top Nazi Hunter: Eastern Europe Rewrote the Holocaust,” by Benny Toker, Ari Yashar, January 27, 2015).

    Yet Zuroff’s s remarks, however sharp, miss the wider historical context. Any day of atonement or, for that matter, any day of repentance on behalf of a victimized group, is highly conflictual, if not warmongering by its nature.

    It was in the name of antifascist victimology and their real and surreal fear of the resurrection of the anticipated fascist Croatia, that local Serbs staged a bloody rebellion in Croatia in 1991. It was in the name of their own post -WWII victims, killed by the victorious Communists on the killing fields of Bleiburg in Austria in May 1945, that Croats, forty-five years thereafter, began their war of secession from the Yugoslav grip. The Ukrainians still nourish the memory of Holodomor, the Poles nurture their memories of Kaytn, the Cossacks commemorate their victims in Linz, the Russians have their numerous Kolymas, the Germans their Dresdens — locations standing not only as memorial sites, but also as symbols of just retribution in the eyes of the Other.

    Full text: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/01/the-curse-of-victimhood-and-negative-identity/

    • Johan Meyer says:

      Ahem. 1991—when the Krajina Serbs were ethnically cleansed by the Croats? What “bloody rebellion”? Were they rebelling bloodily by being shelled in the fashion of Donbass?

      1945—when a Croat reestablished Yugoslavia? Canadian Croat propaganda aside, Serbs did not have the same disproportionate power in post-war Yugoslavia as they did before WWII.

  18. Warren says:

    • Moscow Exile says:

      I’ll try to remember that.

      • PaulR says:

        Who are they??

        • Moscow Exile says:

          That Walker bloke must be one of them. And that Harding from the Grauniad was definitely turning.

          It gets them all who live here: some turn quicker than others, but they all turn. It’s the continuous bludgeoning of the brain cells by the constant repetition of lies by the Kremlin controlled media that does it. And they put something in the water as well.

          • Jen says:

            Must be the staple diet of fish-heads and cabbage that does them in.

            • yalensis says:

              No, it’s the beautiful women.
              Kremlin is running a “honey-pot” type operation, using Putin’s Mafia molls.

              • james says:

                from the initial post – ‘pro white house flu’ – i will use this one the next time i get a chance.. 2 can play this silly game..

            • palmtoptiger says:

              what is it with that fish-heads and cabbage joke? is it some new trend I’m not aware of? cabbage nonwithstanding, fish-heads were never anything but dogfood, even in the 90s…

    • ucgsblog says:

      Most opponents of Aslund suffer from Reality Flu. They are deluded into thinking that they live in this thing, called reality. You have to watch out for those factinistas!

  19. peter says:

  20. peter says:

    • Moscow Exile says:

      So everyone’s half-starved here – or soon will be?

    • james says:

      yea, i am sure putin is wandering around time square as we speak looking for a few pennies… not like there aren’t already enough americans in the same position, lol.. and you say obama laughs about something like that? i can’t find the word to describe such a nobel peace prize leader right now..

    • marknesop says:

      Don’t forget, Obama is also much taller. Pretty much an ass-kicking for Russia all around, innit?

      • palmtoptiger says:

        as well-trained as Putin is for his age, I think a lot of Russians (mostly guys) are kinda overeating nowadays and would do well with some kind of diet. I mean, look at Fedor Emelianenko in most of his matches – he has a veritable beer belly. yep, he still managed to beat pretty much everyone in the world in the MMA superheavyweight division.. but still, some sushi and yoga might do him good 🙂

        • marknesop says:

          He is in pretty good shape for a man his age, and while he plainly likes to have a good time and a few laughs, he doesn’t drink much in public. His opportunities to really relax are probably few and far between, and stress is a killer, so yes, he needs to watch his health for sure.

    • Moscow Exile says:

      That’s from January 30th, Metro News.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        ПРОВЕРЯЕМ СТОИМОСТЬ ПРОДУКТОВОЙ КОРЗИНЫ 12.01.2015

        ХЛЕБ (пшеничный, 1 с, 450г) – 9,80 рублей

        МОЛОКО (3,5%, отборное, 0,93л) – 51,40 рублей

        ЯЙЦО (отборное, 10шт) – 58,90 рублей

        КОЛБАСА (молочная, 450г) – 59,90 рублей

        МАСЛО СЛИВОЧНОЕ (72,5%, 200г) – 26,88 рублей

        МАСЛО РАСТИТЕЛЬНОЕ (раф/дез, 1л) – 43,50 рублей

        КРУПА ГРЕЧНЕВАЯ (в пакетиках, 80г*5) – 56,25 рублей

        САХАР (песок, 1кг) – 53,90 рублей

        ЧАЙ (пакетированный, 20п*2г) – 19,90 рублей

        КОФЕ (растворимый, классический, 100г) – 118,38 рублей

        ГОВЯДИНА ТУШЕНАЯ (кусковая, 340г, ж/б) – 24,50 рублей

        САЙРА (натуральная, с д/м, 250г, ж/б) – 48,89 рублей

        ЛИМОН (1шт) – 24,16 рублей

        ЯБЛОКИ (сорт Рубин, 1кг) – 82,55 рублей

        КАРТОФЕЛЬ (белый, мытый, 1кг) – 31,95 рублей

        МОРКОВЬ (мытая, фасованная, 1кг) – 29,25 рублей

        ЛУК РЕПЧАТЫЙ (1кг) – 44,90 рублей

        ПОМИДОРЫ (1кг, Китай) – 160,88 рублей

        ОГУРЦЫ (1кг) – 192,34 рублей

        ШОКОЛАД (молочный, 90г) – 44,85 рублей

        СЫР (Маасдам, 260г) – 174,68 рублей

        СЫР (Костромской, 280г) – 113,28 рублей

        ЦЫПЛЕНОК-БРОЙЛЕР (охлажденный, 1кг) – 138,78 рублей

        • Moscow Exile says:

          Let’s check the price of food in the the shopping basket
          12 January 2015

          bread (wheat, 1, 450g) – 9.80 rubles

          milk (3.5%, selective, 0,93l) – 51.40 rubles

          eggs (for 10) – 58.90 rubles

          sausage (“milk”, 450g) – 59.90 rubles

          butter (72.5%, 200g) – 26.88 rubles

          vegetable oil (refined / odourless, 1L) – 43.50 rubles

          buckwheat (bags, 80g * 5) – 56.25 rubles

          sugar (granulated, 1kg) – 53.90 rubles

          tea (bags, 20x2g packets) – 19.90 rubles

          coffee (instant “Classic”, 100g) – 118.38 rubles

          beef stew (diced, 340g, w / w) – 24.50 rubles

          saira (Pacific fish, natural, 250 g can) – 48.89 rubles

          lemon(1pc) – 24.16 rubles

          apples (variety Rubin, 1kg) – 82.55 rubles

          potatoes (white, washed, 1kg) – 31.95 rubles

          carrots (washed, packed, 1kg) – 29.25 rubles

          onions (1kg) – 44.90 rubles

          tomatoes (1kg, China) – 160.88 rubles

          gherkins (1kg) – 192.34 rubles

          chocolate (milk, 90g) – 44.85 rubles

          cheese (Maasdam, 260g) – 174.68 rubles

          cheese (Kostroma, 280g) – 113.28 rubles

          chicken broilers (frozen, 1kg) – 138.78 rubles

          Приятного аппетита!

        • PaulR says:

          Avoid tomatoes and cucumbers and you should be ok.

  21. Moscow Exile says:

    Nothing changes!

    1914

    In your dreams, Europe!

    For our Menagerie

    Austro-Hungarian soldier to the left, German Empire soldier to the right

    On the bear: “Russia”

    Beneath the bear: “Serbia”

  22. ThatJ says:

    The peace-loving liberasts strike again. The Guardian is calling for WWIII.

    “Sometimes, only guns can stop guns”

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/01/putin-stopped-ukraine-military-support-russian-propaganda

    • ThatJ says:

      A reader comments,

      I am really shocked, totally shocked by the Guardian and the Independent. I am not British, but I am familiar with with the British press, and I know that these two newspapers represent the left liberal spectrum. These two newspapers, are increasingly becoming on the same page of John McCain/Victoria Nuland/Robert Cagan/Bill Kristoll/John Bohnner/David Frum! What is going on? Are there orders from 10 Downing Street? That’s the only thing that explains it…. If you take it from a moral point of view, neutrality might be the only option, but to side with war mongers like John McCain who overthrew a democratically elected government and caused the civil war in Ukraine can not be explained.

      Another reader adds,

      Oh, goody, a liberal calling for yet another war. They like these, where get to pontificate at a cocktail party, or whine and cheese event, about the awfulness of this war, after they change their mind. And, God forbid that they, personally, risk their precious hides or those of their brats, to the consequential violence and death involved. Here’s an idea – every editorial windbag calling for military action is immediately drafted and sent to the front lines of the conflict or “cause” they tout.

      • Southerncross says:

        We have come full circle – once again the people shrieking for war are the same people who spent years demanding military budget cuts.

        Eerie.

    • astabada says:

      From the Guardian article:

      Before he goes, more blood and tears will flow unquietly down the river Donets.

      Where exactly is this river?

    • Jen says:

      Brought to The Guardian’s readers by the well-named waste recycling management and sustainability expert Timothy Garbage Trash.

    • Fern says:

      Well, Timothy Garton Ash never met a war he didn’t like. Much of this has to do with the Guardian moving or trying to move into the US market so its rhetoric needs to mimic US voices and, as we know, there’s barely a cigarette paper’s width of difference between republican and democratic attitudes to Russia and Ukraine.

    • ucgsblog says:

      “Won’t that feed a siege mentality in Russia? Yes, but then the Putin regime is stoking that mentality with its nationalist, anti-western propaganda. If the threat did not exist, Russian television would invent it.”

      Doesn’t that imply that they’re threatening Russia? Idiots…

    • marknesop says:

      Didn’t even need to read it; it’s that strident Russophobe Timothy Garton Ash, who when not penning smoldering assaults against Russia, is being invited to comment in similar articles by other raving Russophobes.

      Which makes me wonder; why is it that, although people like Ash regularly swear Russia is collapsing and beyond hope, when it doesn’t happen everyone just forgets what they said and continues to regard them as a reliable source?

  23. Warren says:

  24. et Al says:

    Via SpaceDaily:

    A F Pee Ukrainian forces face drones, electronic jamming: US
    http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ukrainian_forces_face_drones_electronic_jamming_US_999.html
    Ukrainian troops are struggling to counter artillery fire and electronic jamming by pro-Russian militants, who are flying drones to target the Kiev government forces, a top US general said Thursday…

    … “It is very difficult for Ukrainian forces to be able to operate on radios, telephones and other non-secure means of communications because their opponents have such an exceptional amount of jamming capability,” said Hodges, commander of US Army Europe.

    “Even if you can acquire where mortar or rockets are coming from, to be able to do something about it is very difficult if you can’t communicate.”..

    … “The rebels have Russian-provided UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) that are giving the rebels the detection capability and the ability to target Ukrainian forces,” the general said, speaking from an American base at Wiesbaden.

    “So they’ve suffered heavy casualties from heavy artillery and from rockets.”..

    … Hodges said planned US military instruction for Kiev’s forces, which is due to start in the spring, could help alleviate the impact of the jamming and artillery fire, while also helping with emergency medical care.

    The training, which will focus on units from Ukraine’s interior ministry, will help local forces find “ways to avoid jamming” and to adhere to special procedures when using radios, Hodges said….
    #####

    Some interesting claims. Of course Uke forces have shown themselves to be highly incompetent so a lot of the General’s complaints come off as a ‘Not fair!’ argument. Note the story alongside that Poland will be calling up its 38k reservists for military exercises in 2016 and are now calling for “All citizens interested in taking part in military exercises will be able to sign up starting March 1″ at regional recruitment centres”, Tomasz Siemoniak told reporters. Nothing like a bit of paranoia to get the blood flowing!

    • kirill says:

      One word: Stingers. I applaud Russia’s government for aiding the rebels in substantial ways.

      I am quite sure that this support did not appear before the regime plumbed the depths of war criminal depravity. So the regime cannot cry “they did it to us”. The regime did it to itself.

    • marknesop says:

      Tsk! The nerve!! After nice Americans gave the Ukies drones, and even had a detachment of Americans dedicated to flying drones for them back during the Crimean unpleasantry, from somewhere around Kherson, and gave them counterbattery radars so they could tell where mortar fire was coming from. Don’t they know that jammers kill people? Oh, wait – they don’t. In this case, they prevent the Ukies from killing people, and if they would withdraw and head back to their own part of Ukraine they would find there was nobody chasing them.

      As far as Poland goes, great idea! Nothing so good for Polish industry and commerce as having everyone of working age in the army.

  25. Moscow Exile says:

    Classic Kesselschlacht:

    Thus began the slaughter”–Debaltsevo and its Consequences

    Just to understand the hopelessness of the Ukrainian position, one must keep in mind that at Debaltsevo 90% of casualties are caused by artillery fire. In the last few days Novorossia forces gradually used its artillery to force Ukrainian units off the commanding heights, took the only road from Artemovsk under fire. Junta soldiers report that Novorossia artillery superiority here is simply overwhelming. Even without a full encirclement, Novorossia can shoot Ukrainian fortified points with impunity.

    Thus began the slaughter.

    (From Fort Russ)

    Why doesn’t Timothy Garton-Ash toddle along and give the Yukies a helping hand?

    Lukie-boy could lend a hand as well.

    And what abouts Anders Foghorn, the former NATO swashbuckler? He’s got plenty of time on his hands now. He could show some willing, if only a speech. I’m sure it would be appreciated – good for morale and so on.

    • ThatJ says:

      Comments from the linked Fort Rus article:

      All that nazi rhetoric of Kyev regime/Right sector is a perfect cover for a fact that Kyev junta/Right sector is run by zionist Jews.

      And this reply:

      Bingo.
      The same clans who were responsible for the rape of Russia and other USSR countries on the breakup. They have been curtailed to an extent in Russia but in Ukraine they have been the nails in her coffin all through independence.
      The train wreak of a country we see is the direct result and not much different to Weimar Republic Germany in the 20’s Let’s pray for a better out come this time for Ukraine though.

      I see that not everyone was fooled by the official Kremlin narrative (I’m sorry to say this, I understand that Moscow cannot talk about the Jewish involvement freely without attracting the fury of International Jewry upon itself, which can only further aggravate the situation), though I disagree with Right Sector being run by Zionist Jews. Nevertheless, they serve Zionist interests, hence the “shabbos goyim” label I use to describe them.

      The day that Ukraine is run by real nationalists, as opposed to Zionist agents and their shabbos goy “nationalists”, is the day the BBC, NYT, Guardian et al will scream from the depths of their lungs about the Nazi menace in Kiev and how democracy was destroyed. Sanctions will follow, of course.

      • yalensis says:

        Dear ThatJ:
        As usual, you are full of your own B.S. You have to try to fit every single fact in the universe into your narrow and frankly delusionary mindset.

        What kind of overwheening arrogance induces you to “assume” that the Kremlin secretly agrees with your Jew-hating views? All evidence actually points to the fact, that Vladimir Putin is quite friendly to the Jewish people and doesn’t even have much of a beef against Israel, although he obviously doesn’t agree with all their positions and foreign policy.

        You are obviously correct that there are several quite prominent Jewish figures in the Ukrainian government, and among the Banderite parties, not to mention among their handlers in the U.S. State Department. But these facts do not give you the right to to make broad generalizations or claim secret knowledge of Kremlin views. I doubt if you ever studied Russian history, and you are certain no Kremlinologist.

        Do you have some hidden source inside the Kremlin, who whispers into your ear that, “Oh, we actually agree with you, ThatJ, you’re totally right about the Jewish involvement in Ukraine, but you KNOW that we can’t talk freely about any of that….”

        Here is a question for you, by the way:
        What is your opinion of the governments of the 3 Baltic countries, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia? All of whom honour Nazis and Nazi collaborators. All of whom are led by genuine white-skinned Baltic nationalists. Just the kind of people you like.
        The Western media and their “Zionist/Trotskyite” agents never criticize these governments for their nationalism or their pro-Nazi affectations.

        Are the Baltic Banderite equivalents “shabbos goyim” too, in your view? Because they are pro-American? Or could it possibly just be, that Americans use whichever material is handy for them in whatever arena they are interfering in? Be it Ukraine (cattle fodder = Banderites), Latvia (cattle fodder = Nazis), Syria (cattle fodder = jihadis). etc etc.

        It’s all actually much simpler than the twisted moebius strip of a “theory” which you have spun, based on your own phobias and hatreds.

        • ThatJ says:

          What kind of overwheening arrogance induces you to “assume” that the Kremlin secretly agrees with your Jew-hating views?

          If the Kremlin insiders are realistic, then some of them are certainly aware of the disproportionate role of Jews/Zionists in shaping American foreign policy. Unfortunately, being realistic also means that they cannot state this fact openly. A clue to the past:

          Putin: First Soviet government was mostly Jewish

          What is your opinion of the governments of the 3 Baltic countries, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia? All of whom honour Nazis and Nazi collaborators. All of whom are led by genuine white-skinned Baltic nationalists. Just the kind of people you like.
          The Western media and their “Zionist/Trotskyite” agents never criticize these governments for their nationalism or their pro-Nazi affectations.

          Because the Baltics are useless: economically useless, militarily useless. Even if Hitler himself ruled a Baltic nation, his country would pose no threat to the status quo. The usefulness of the Baltics is in the noise they make. Their nationalism served and serves a purpose: to push an anti-Russian agenda within the EU. The US encouraged this long-repressed nationalism in the former Soviet countries and the US is encouraging Ukrainian nationalism right now. These facts say nothing of the internal US policy or the policies regarding identity and nationalism in the “Old West”, i.e. the countries that have been under Anglo-American hegemony since 1945, where displacement-level immigration, hostility to national identity and a pathological self-hating suicide cult are the political and cultural norms. Between attacking Baltic nationalism or breaking Russian power, guess which one is more important to the Western establishment?

          It’s all actually much simpler than the twisted moebius strip of a “theory” which you have spun, based on your own phobias and hatreds.

          A person like you would stand no chance in running a country because you are too naïve. Russia would have long been lost to the oligarchs of the 90s if the yalensis of the world formed the Russian political and security elite back then, especially the latter. Your foolish worldview cost the Anglo-Saxons the United States, where they have been displaced by Jews as the country’s elite.

          This is what yalensis hopes to see happening in Russia:
          http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Kaufmann.html

          Unfortunately for yalensis, Russia is not ruled by weak-willed utopians:
          http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2008/08/the-neocons-versus-russia/

          • spartacus says:

            From what I can make from the Jerusalem Post piece you linked, I think Putin was not criticizing the Jewish members of the first Soviet government for being Zionist, but for being communists and atheists.

            The event he was attending, was about placing the books from a library that was nationalized during the times of the Soviet Union in an institution called “Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center”. He used this opportunity to point out that those books were nationalized by a government staffed mostly by Jews who, in his view, “were guided by false ideological considerations and supported the arrest and repression of Jews, Russian Orthodox Christians, Muslims and members of other faiths. They grouped everyone into the same category”.

            I think that when he speaks about “false ideological considerations” he means Communism because later he states that “Thankfully, those ideological goggles and faulty ideological perceptions collapsed.”. I don’t think that if he was talking about Zionism he would have chosen to characterize it as a collapsed ideology.

            • yalensis says:

              Exactly. Putin was using the occasion of returning the Lubavitch library as a gesture of goodwill towards the Jewish religion, and also not letting slip by the chance to insert some anti-communist propaganda into the mix!

              That sound-bite about the Soviet government being mostly Jewish, was just used to invoke a sense of historical irony. Putin is known for having a somewhat twisted sense of humour.

              Nothing else can be read into this incident. But it does provide additional evidence for what I asserted above, namely, that Putin is actually rather pro-Jewish in his views.

              • Max says:

                I’ve posted this before. From Israel Shamir, ex-jew:

                Our view agrees with Marx and Lenin’s reading of Jewishness. In 1903, Lenin wrote in the Iskra, and his words are extremely relevant to the present discussion: “the idea of a Jewish ‘nationality’ is scientifically wrong and politically reactionary, not only when expounded by its consistent advocates (the Zionists), but likewise on the lips of those who try to combine it with the ideas of Social-Democracy (the Bundists). The idea of a Jewish nationality runs counter to the interests of the Jewish proletariat, for it fosters among them, directly or indirectly, a spirit hostile to assimilation, the spirit of the ‘ghetto’.”

                http://www.israelshamir.net/Left/Left1.htm

                So what if the first Bolsheviks included lots of Jews? If they imagined the world owed them special privileges on account of their precious jewdihood, then they were not true Reds. Marx/Engels addressed the Manifesto to the Workers of the World, not excepting Jews.

                Here are Philippine Communists https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iNFNGXJgro

                Not a Jew in sight.

          • spartacus says:

            “…Russia would have long been lost to the oligarchs of the 90s if the yalensis of the world formed the Russian political…”

            I don’t think so, because I presume he would have nationalized their assets…

            • yalensis says:

              Nationalized their asses? Heh heh heh!

              Are you kidding, I would nationalize their TONSILS!
              Not only that, Khodorkovsky, Berezovsky, and the other oligarchs would be hauled off to the Gulag and put to work digging potatoes before you could say, “Ivan Denisovich had a bad hair day.”

              This is why I should never come to power.

              • Jen says:

                That is why Mark Chapman never puts you in charge here when he’s on holidays.
                🙂

              • yalensis says:

                I know, but he sometimes puts YOU in charge, and, let’s admit it, you are just as blood-thirsty and power-hungry as I am.
                If not more.

                • Jen says:

                  You’re telling me.

                  Here are some photos of me practising for the big day when Mark put me in charge of KS:

                  🙂

                • yalensis says:

                  Aw!!!! you’re such a cute wittle tyrant….

                • Jen says:

                  I was precocious:

                  My folks reported me to the authorities who immediately took me away and sent me to dictatorship-training school.

                • kirill says:

                  That’s horrible! The poor puppy. 🙂

                • marknesop says:

                  Stop!!! You’re killing me!!!!!

                • marknesop says:

                  Damn, that’s funny. It even looks a little bit like you. I wish we lived closer to one another, because I am convinced an evening in your company would leave me with my face like a piece of wood from laughing so much – you know how your cheeks ache when you can’t stop laughing? You are one funny woman.

                • marknesop says:

                  I did put yalensis in charge once, while I was away, and when I came back everyone was sitting around holding hands and singing “kumbaya”, and there had been nothing in the comments for two days except cat and puppy pictures.

                  As they say in “The Hangover”…not up in here.

              • james says:

                i thought this was funny the first time you said, lol…

          • Jen says:

            As Spartacus and Yalensis have observed, the event that Putin attended where he made the speech about the Bolshevik government being dominated by Jews was the handover of the Schneerson Library to the Jewish Museum and the Moscow Tolerance Center. The people in the audience were Orthodox Jews of the Chabad sect.
            http://rbth.com/arts/2013/06/13/russias_chief_rabbi_welcomes_decision_to_transfer_schneerson_library_to_27048.html

            By transferring the library to the museum, Putin was actually making the books and other documents more accessible to Jewish people, regardless of whether they belong to the sect or not. The American Chabad Orthodox Jewish community had complained about the Russian govt’s decision to transfer the collection and had wanted it sent over to the US. This would have made the collection accessible only to members of their own community and not to Jewish people generally.

            ThatJ, you need to research the context of Putin’s speech more carefully before posting it to demonstrate your views – your naivety is showing you up.
            🙂

          • ThatJ says:

            @Jen

            Ehh, I know the context very well, and it doesn’t matter.

            What matters is that Putin committed what would otherwise be considered an anti-semitic offense: he evoked memories of the “Judeo-Bolshevism” accusations that many gentiles are — and were — “guilty” of making about Jews and their role in communism.

            It’s interesting, to say the least, that he knows about it.

            Jews freely admit this among themselves. SeeEncyclopaedia Judaica:

            “In some countries Jews became the leading element in the legal and illegal Communist parties and in some cases were even instructed by the Communist International to change their Jewish-sounding names and pose as non-Jews, in order not to confirm right-wing propaganda that presented Communism as an alien, Jewish conspiracy.”

            What modern political movement is Jewish-inspired in the US? And can you call it that way?

    • spartacus says:

      From the piece linked here by Moscow Exile:

      ” Hundreds of armed militants have (spontaneously?) assembled in Kiev, which means that the recent pillar of the regime in the form of several hundred bayonets arrived in Kiev to hear the president report on the progress of his work. Moreover, it’s obvious from their faces they are not concerned about any reports. Dmitriy Yarosh is giving interviews about forming a parallel General Staff, the Right Sector is openly arming its supporters in Kiev, creating the so-called 13th Reserve Battalion. Kiev is hastily preparing for the anniversary of the coup.”

      I find this rather interesting. I suppose it will happen eventually. If Poroshenko fails to deliver the promised victory against the rebels, the Nazis will go for his throat.

      • yalensis says:

        Or, alternatively, Porky could pull his own “Night of the Long Knives” on Yarosh and the others.
        We should start a betting pool….

      • marknesop says:

        Haste the day, say I. Not because Yarosh would be a better leader of Ukraine than Poroshenko, because both are useless while Yarosh is venomous into the bargain. But if that regime change or one anything like it took place it would no longer be possible for the west to deny Ukraine’s slide into fascism and Nazi ideology.

        • ThatJ says:

          I may be playing the Devil’s Advocate here, but if there was a coup in Kiev by hardcore armed nationalists, would they continue to follow American orders?

          I don’t think the situation can get worse than they are, for the simple reason that the current junta is 100% under American control.

          If hardcore nationalists assumed power and replaced Avakov, Yats, Turchita and Porky and kicked the US Embassy out of the country, it could actually make it easier for Ukraine to make a compromise with Russia.

    • Johan Meyer says:

      Payback for Slavyansk.

    • patient observer says:

      Obama has removed his own mask – nothing but a lying and murderous dirt bag. If all of the lies about Putin were somehow transmuted into truth, he would still be better than Obama.

    • Ilya says:

      We regime-changed some folks.

    • Fern says:

      I’m not sure too much should be read into this. Obama, after all, mentioned during one speech that Kosovo broke away from Serbia after an ‘internationally-monitored referendum’ which was a surprise to most folk, especially the Kosovaars. The power ‘transition’ deal was ostensibly brokered by the foreign ministers of France, Germany and Poland and then reneged on almost immediately when the coup happened. So Obama could be giving a glimpse of the men behind the curtain, pulling the strings of the EU puppets, or admitting that the US ‘power-broking’ was with the coup leaders or just showing he’s not really particularly well-informed as with Kosovo. Maybe the teleprompter had broken.

  26. et Al says:

    Taking us back to Peter Pomerantsev from the last thread, if your are in to self-flagellation, you can listen to a serialization by the luvvies at the BBC of his book ‘Nothing is true and everything is possible’ on the radio:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0505zw3

    In the early 2000s, Peter Pomerantsev (Kiev-born, raised in England; the son of Russian political exiles) came to Moscow to work in the fast-growing television and film industry. The job gave him first hand access to every nook and corrupt cranny of the country. He was perfectly placed to witness the transformation of the New Russia on its journey from communist collapse to a new form of dictatorship.

    In a series of character studies, the subjects of Pomerantsev’s reality TV documentaries, we glimpse the ways in which the Russian people have responded to and acted upon the opportunities (as well as terrible injustices) of Putin’s new world order. Including, Oliona, professionally trained ‘gold digger’, escaping a bleak upbringing in Siberia; Vitaly, gangster-turned-filmmaker who studied his favourite American mafia movies and then made his auto theft crimes the subject of a hit six part drama series; and, Mozhayev, an architectural and urban historian who fights in vain to save what remains of the buildings of the Moscow that existed before the Soviet experiment.

    Written by Peter Pomerantsev

  27. ThatJ says:

    Reportedly civilians are preparing to resist mass mobilization in Odessa, confirmation needed:

  28. ThatJ says:

    Pictures of Russia‬’s new National Defense Control Center (NDCC), launched in December at a cost of more than $6 billion USD.

  29. ThatJ says:

    http://twitter.com/ArmedResearch/status/561996596288946177

    Sources inside #Debaltseve confirm the #Ukraine National Guard has abandoned their positions there.

    [ThatJ: Where did they go? They are trapped in Debaltseve. The only road not controlled by the seps are under seps’ fire. Maybe I’m misreading here, and abandoning their positions don’t necessarily mean abandoning Debaltseve. Maybe they fled to a safer location inside Debaltseve. I guess they are preparing for their eventual capture. They’ll claim they are UA army soldiers and not NG scum.]

    Poroshenko Urges Ukraine Cease-Fire After Minsk Peace Talks Fail

    (Bloomberg) — Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko called for a truce in the eastern European country after peace talks broke down and violence escalated.
    Poroshenko, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande insisted during a telephone conversation Sunday on “an unconditional and immediate cease-fire as the conflict is escalating and the number of civilian casualties is growing,” according to a statement on the Ukrainian leader’s website.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-01/poroshenko-urges-ukraine-cease-fire-after-minsk-peace-talks-fail

    • patient observer says:

      i.e. the Uke’s are falling back in a panic.

      • PaulR says:

        Reports of Ukrainians abandoning Debaltsevo are almost certainly false. The position seems to be that the salient is narrowing and the rebels are shelling the one road in and out, but only sporadically and inaccurately, so people and supplies can still move along it most of the time. Rebels have advanced this week, but slowly and only after lots of softening up with artillery. Ukrainians’ outlook is bleak, but not yet helpless, and rebels have lost a lot of casualties as well. Ukrainians may yet be surrounded, but may hold out. Still in the balance.

        • yalensis says:

          True.
          But the fact that Porky is calling for a ceasefire means that he must be WORRIED.
          When he thought he was winning, Porky was thumping his chest like a gorilla and exhorting the “cyborgs” to fight to their last drop of blood.

        • kirill says:

          The Debaltsevo pocket is collapsing. The regime no longer controls all of Debaltsevo itself.

        • patient observer says:

          The reports I have read suggested that the rebels are using artillery extremely effectively. I agree that the Ukes may not be abandoning Debaltsevo but perhaps they should before they can’t.
          http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none.html

          • yalensis says:

            Even the KyivPost says the news is dire, although they blame Ukie failure on sneaky saboteurs rather than effective artillery:


            Enemy infiltration has already dealt Ukraine’s defense of Debaltseve, a small city with a pre-war population of 25,000 and a strategic rail and road junction, a devastating blow. The loss of Vuhlehirsk, a village some 10 kilometers west of Debaltseve, puts pro-Russian artillery within firing range of the only supply route to Ukraine’s forces there.

            “Over the past few weeks this group of terrorists has infiltrated (Vuhlehirsk) disguised as civilians and (we were) hit from the rear,” Semen Semenchenko, commander of the pro-Kyiv Donbas battalion, wrote on Facebook. “Artillery fire struck tanks at the positions of our forces. There are enemy armored vehicles, sniper nests in people’s homes.”

            The situation in Debaltseve itself looked increasingly difficult for Ukraine on the night of Feb. 1 with Ukrainian news outlet Novoe Vremya reporting that Russian-backed separatists had reached city limits, causing National Guard units to flee.

            P.S. – I think there is some truth to this, because I was reading in other sources about the “anti-fascist” resistance behind enemy lines. By which, they mean, in occupied parts of Donetsk.
            But I personally believe that behind-the-lines Resistance movements never can accomplish as much as they are cracked up to be.
            I could be wrong, though.

          • patient observer says:

            Also per the line provided by et Al
            http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ukrainian_forces_face_drones_electronic_jamming_US_999.html
            Considering the source, its strong evidence of the rebel’s effective use of artillery as well as access to advanced technology.

  30. Warren says:

    ​Hacktivist leak alleges ‘extortion & money laundering’ by Ukraine’s Right Sector leader

    Anti-Kiev hacking group CyberBerkut has released legal documents allegedly obtained from the office of Ukrainian far-right politician and warlord Dmitry Yarosh, which it claims implicate him in a host of economic crimes.

    “We are publishing documents that expose the criminal activities of the head of Ukrainian neo-Nazis, which confirm multiple incidences of extortion – the illegal and cynical seizure of properties and businesses belonging to Ukrainian citizens by Yarosh and his associates. The stolen money is then taken out of the country through fronts and deposited in offshore accounts,” reads an unsigned document that accompanies a series of document scans on the CyberBerkut website.

    http://rt.com/news/228387-ukraine-hacktivists-leak-yarosh/

  31. peter says:

    • Johan Meyer says:

      Oh, this old trope. How cute. Blaming Milosevic for the actions of the (US sponsored) Bosnians and the (German sponsored) Croats (not to leave the Slovenians out of the picture). Really cute.
      Slobodan Milosevic, in 1989:
      Never in history have Serbs lived alone in Serbia. Today more than ever before, citizens of other nationalities and ethnic groups are living here. This is not a handicap for Serbia. I am sincerely convinced that it is an advantage. National structure is changing in all countries in the contemporary world, especially in developed countries. More and more, and more and more successfully, citizens of different nationalities, different faiths and races are living together. Socialism in particular being a progressive and just democratic society, should not allow people to be divided by national or religious identity … Yugoslavia is a multinational community, and it can survive only on condition of full equality of all nations that live in it… Equal and harmonious relations among Yugoslav peoples are a necessary way out of the crisis and in particular, they are a necessary condition for its economic and social prosperity.

      Oric doing the choppy (head) choppy probably played a much bigger role, as did US support for Izetbegovic’s intransience. But we aren’t supposed to talk about the ethnic cleansing of the Krajina Serbs by the Croats either, right, much less mention that Tesla was a Krajina Serb, right? Killing Serbs is legitimate sport, no?

      • Johan Meyer says:

        intrasigience, but the point stands…

      • patient observer says:

        Quite a hate speech by Milosevic (as the MSM would claim). I think that when a true history of Yugoslavia is eventually written (not the self-serving versions written by Britain or the US), Milosevic will be viewed as a man who outsmarted the West – sort of a Putin in that regard but with far less options and resources. He died a hero in my book.

        • Johan Meyer says:

          I don’t regard him that highly. To me, he is more like Habyarimana—had he been willing to harm western interests, and buck US games, his country would have been stronger.

          If Milosevic had arrested any of the many criminals operating in Yugoslavia, e.g. Otpor, the Soros gang and company, shut down some dubious embassies and the like, many people who needlessly were expelled or killed would be alive/in a much better condition. If he had taken a simple measure, such as making a natural science or engineering program available in Albanian, and undermined the PC/victimology/psychobabble Kosovo Albanian academic programs, Kosovo wouldn’t currently be a den of kidnappers/opium smugglers/organ traders. But Milosevic started as a ‘reformer.’

          If Habyarimana had say arrested Dallaire when it became obvious that the latter was ferrying arms and personnel for Uganda, or when Dallaire stole the Egyptian ammunition ordered before the Ugandan invasion, or when Dallaire shut down one of the functioning runways in Kigali, and renounced debts when the IMF met in Mulindi (RPF capital) or when they increased loans to Uganda because the RPF was nominally no longer part of the Ugandan forces, despite still being supplied by Uganda, or declared the US ambassador persona non grata after one of the latter’s many sojourns to Mulindi [which other ambassador visits a foreign invading army using peacekeepers?], etc., I might have respected him. There’d have been no genocide in that case, though we would still be hearing genocide being bandied about. But Habyarimana came to power in a Tutsi coup (albeit a less bloody one than the Tutsi coup at the same time in Burundi, and the Rwandan Tutsis felt a need to have a Hutu frontman; they were presumably undermined by Kagame), and was always going to be someone else’s person. His ministers in the mid 90s had to be approved by the US ambassador.

          But if you want some amusement, go read Accidental Genocide (on Rwanda)—they have a nice US diplomatic memo, where they spell out their reasoning regarding Bosnia—a given proposal should first be vetted by Izetbegovic, as it would look bad if Milosevic accepts the proposal, and it is then turned down by Izetbegovic. (I.e. Milosevic was quite willing to accept proposals, without undermining the harmful aims of his de facto western opponents).

      • marknesop says:

        I am ashamed now of how easily I bought into the NATO-generated, regime-changers-enabled demonization of Milosevic as an evil, repressive ogre. I knew nothing at the time and just waved the flag I was told to wave (not literally, but you know what I mean). I bought into the notion that NATO was genetically incapable of lying to save its own skin, or intervening on other than genuine humanitarian grounds. I think that sales pitch is sweetened by the fact that NATO is not a consistent liar or false interventionist, and some, perhaps many of its actions are defensible and beneficial. Many and maybe all of the west’s regime-change interventions since then can be traced to the overthrow of Milosevic and the birth of OTPOR and the Gene Sharp playbook.

        • Johan Meyer says:

          I guess it is the context, though. Because of the many (real and fake) lying scandals with the various treasonous actions by communist-affiliated movements around the world, there usually was enough reason for most people in non-communist societies to suspect that they really were up against an evil conspiracy. People often trust their own authorities, on account of witnessing attacks on one’s own society (real and operation gladio style manipulation), and trust said authorities upon witnessing the manipulative character of many of these movements.

    • ucgsblog says:

      Claiming that USSR dissolved peacefully is extremely dumb. Maybe he’s confusing it with CSSR.

  32. peter says:

  33. peter says:

    • Max says:

      Why are you posting these? Are we deprived of “news” from NYT, WSJ, Bloomberg, Brookings?

      • james says:

        the brainwashing spigot has to remain fully open, otherwise people would start to think someone nice like biden or kerry where the kleptomaniacs, as opposed to putin.. propaganda war is ugly, but it is a good thing we have peter to keep us up to date with the constant drone of bullshit spewed from the west, lol…

      • patient observer says:

        Peter’s posts are as interesting as those mosquitoes that buzz around your ear on a hot summer night but not quite as informative.

    • palmtoptiger says:

      Yulia Ioffe is the one source I really needed today.

  34. ThatJ says:

    Here’s a high definition video of Putin’s supposed daughter:

    Hey Moscow Exile, has the rumor been confirmed?

  35. PaulR says:

    Returning to the theme of Mark’s post, my favourite quote on Russian liberals is that of 19th century political philosopher Boris Chicherin (himself something of a liberal, though of the unique Russian conservative-liberal type). Chicherin wrote: “The Russian liberal travels on a few high-sounding words: freedom, openness, public opinion … which he interprets as having no limits. … Hence he regards as products of outrageous despotism the most elementary concepts, such as obedience to law or the need for a police and bureaucracy.”

    • kirill says:

      I think the liberals of the 1800s have nothing to do with the current crop of 5th columnists. They loathe free speech for the masses and public opinion and worship gangster oligarchs and despots like Pinochet. They want the “bydlo” brought to heel. Putin’s gravest crime is representing the will of the “bydlo”.

      • Moscow Exile says:

        In the first place, what is liberalism, speaking generally, but an attack (whether mistaken or reasonable, is quite another question) upon the existing order of things? Is this so? Yes. Very well. Then my ‘fact’ consists in this, that RUSSIAN liberalism is not an attack upon the existing order of things, but an attack upon the very essence of things themselves–indeed, on the things themselves; not an attack on the Russian order of things, but on Russia itself. My Russian liberal goes so far as to reject Russia; that is, he hates and strikes his own mother. Every misfortune and mishap of the mother-country fills him with mirth, and even with ecstasy. He hates the national customs, Russian history, and everything. – Dostoevsky, “The Idiot”.

        19th century attitude of a Russian conservative.

        And today?

        Are Russian “liberals” any different?

    • marknesop says:

      That is a beauty indeed – a perfect counterfoil to puffy Anders Ostlunds’ latest bleat that he has a case of “Freedom Flu” which he has had for many years, followed by the usual blather about being able to criticize politicians, free press, bla, bla.

  36. cartman says:

    https://twitter.com/yurybarmin/status/561478171925954560

    What a rotten prick. Clearly it is the Obama regime that is blocking all dialogue and negotiation so that more people can die. The Nobel Peace Prize winner turned out to be a murderous sociopath.

  37. spartacus says:

    I found this entry, linked below, on the English version of Cassad’s blog. It gives some info about the situation in Uglegorsk.

    “Uglegorsk is controlled by the NAF. After the approach to Kalinovka the configuration of the truncated Debalcevo encirclement is emerging. The NAF failed to create a large encirclement by closing the ring near Svetlodarsk, but by capturing Uglegorsk (let’s consider this a plan B of sorts) they managed to find a weakness in the enemy formation, due to which a part of the junta military under Debalcevo ended up under the threat of encirclement. It hangs on a single shelled road, which is may well be cut somewhere in the area of Logvinovo. We may expect new attempts to recapture Uglegorsk and to keep the control over the M-103 Road. Kostya Grishin disappeared somewhere after the announced offensive on Uglegorsk, which triggered a huge wave of rumors. Today it turned out that the scumbag was actually hit, but not too much.”

    http://cassad-eng.livejournal.com/112930.html

    I found this paragraph especially amusing:

    “a prisoner tried to remove the tattoo using a brick in order not to give himself out too much (because the fascists know that they are treated very differently than the AFU conscripts), but the stamp of nazism is not so easy to scrub off.”

    After this paragraph there is a photo of some guy who has a “Right Sector” tattoo on his arm with visible abrasion marks. Can you imagine the shear fear that prompted him to try to scrub off his tattoo by using a brick? You just can’t make this stuff up…

    • spartacus says:

      Ooops, it seems the picture of the guy with the tattoo is from last year. My bad. Still funny, though…

    • yalensis says:

      The moral of the story is:

      “Listen, children, NEVER get a tattoo!
      Under any circumstances!”

      • Max says:

        The thing about tattoos is that they always skip a generation. Youngsters growing up see the faded smudges on the arms of their decrepit elders, and foreswear tattoos. Their children decry the plain arms of their parents and flock to tattoo parlo(u)rs.

  38. kirill says:

    http://itar-tass.com/en/world/774758

    “Hollande, Merkel, Poroshenko call for immediate ceasefire in Ukraine”

    No FUCKING way. This is the same scam they pulled last fall to save their hides. They did not stop shelling civilians 24/7 during that “ceasefire”. No ceasefire can be even discussed until they are driven out of artillery range of the Donbas population points.

    • cartman says:

      At some point, couldn’t they invite non-OSCE countries like China as observers?

      It is in China’s interest, if you remember the time Clinton bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.

    • Fern says:

      kirill, I totally agree. A ceasefire is surely meant to be the precursor to talks aimed at permanently ending conflicts not an opportunity to withdraw, regroup and work out how to involve more NATO forces in fighting for one side. Hard as it sounds, Kiev needs to experience an overwhelming military defeat so that a resurgence of fighting by them in the east is just a non-starter no matter how much the US/EU/NATO eggs them on.

  39. Patrick Armstrong says:

    All I can say is that a fool can ask more questions than ten wise men can answer. Or, to rephrase it in this context, one fool can make more accusations in a hundred words than Marks can answer in ten thousand.

  40. Johan Meyer says:

    Kreakly—Russian hipsters? Are they the vibrant creative class, though?

  41. Fern says:

    Another excellent post, Mark, really, really sharp and very funny. Great stuff. it’s interesting doing a compare & contrast exercise with the media. When Putin first took power, western media was generally pretty neutral towards him, even mildly favourable. One phrase occurs over and over again – strange how that happens in our supposedly free press – in articles written around the 2000 and 2001 mark – “Mr Putin is expected to continue Mr Yeltsin’s reforms”. The media tide turned once it became clear Mr P wasn’t going to be Mr Y redux and it’s then he became akin to Lucifer while every crook and fraudster Russia tried to hold to account morphed into freedom and democracy warriors.

    As Ukraine shows, as long as governments are willing to open up their economies totally to western interests and cooperate with whatever geopolitical game du jour is in play, they can pretty much do what they like when they like to their citizenry.

    • marknesop says:

      Thanks very much, Fern, and it’s great to see you back, we missed you and wondered what had happened to you. Visions of you stuffed into a big hockey bag in the trunk of Dave “Bro” Cameron’s car.

      We are on exactly the same page regarding the dawning of western re-perception on the subject of Putin, and I wrote almost exactly that some time ago…oh, yes – here, in the entry on Kathy Lally. I really must get my archives into some kind of shape.

    • marknesop says:

      Welcome, nonconformer, good to see you. Indeed, Putin is a hero to his people – as anyone in any country would be who has overseen such improvement to the living standard as Putin has. A standard counternarrative runs, “So what? It’s still way below the standard for the USA”. Generally speaking, yes, that’s true, although people should be careful of being sucked in by per-capita GDP, which is just GDP divided by population; inequality is the real decisive factor for poverty. However, Putin has at least tripled the standard of living for his people, and had he not achieved that, his international critics would be quite happy to suggest he had accomplished nothing. Got that? Did nothing – what a loser. Tripled the living standard – so what, not as good as the USA, still a loser.

  42. ucgsblog says:

    “Russia’s stubborn refusal to collapse on schedule must be disappointing.”

    “Yes, wealthy businessmen almost invariably lift up the poor around them to an ecstasy of prosperity. Like Kolomoisky did for Dnepropetrovsk. Or Akhmetov for the Donbass coal miners, many of whom are spitting out the window of Rolls-Royces right now, thanks to his munificence.”

    Nice gems Mark, it’s why I enjoy the blog!

    “Yes, folks, even though Crimea was a gift to Ukraine by the First Secretary of the Soviet Union which was accomplished without soliciting the opinion of anyone else in Russia, Ukraine’s claim on it is the only legitimate one. Fuck what the people who live there think.”

    I know – I’ve been explaining to anyone whomever asked me about Crimea, what actually happened. Quite a few don’t mind it being a part of Russia, whereas others come up with asinine excuses, including “Russia will never hold a referendum b/c they cannot win with 82% of the vote”. Apparently in their minds, the result of 100-82 is greater than 82%. And they’re the ones who lambast Lukashenko over winning 150% of the vote… oh the irony.

    “Bershidsky spends the rest of the piece reframing “nothing at all to do with Putin” so that readers understand that really all expensive property owned by Russian political figures belongs to Putin, and they’re just kind of holding it for him until he decides to take possession.”

    It’s Putin’s fault by default. You see, he deviously ordered Ukraine’s armed forces to leave Buk at the border, then ordered Rebels to take photos with Buk, and followed it up by placing Rebels without radar in front of these weapons in order to allow EU to impose more sanctions on Russia, while Oligarchs were holding Dachas for him in Switzerland, to ensure payment. Any other version is a pro-Putin conspiracy theory.

    Also, keep in mind that if Americans vote on the basis of economy – it’s because Americans are good capitalists. If Ukrainians vote on the basis of the economy, they’re filthy pro-Putin traitors to their homeland, which existed in the ninth century, and anyone who says otherwise is a historical revisionist, including Karamzin, who became one in the 21st century, despite being dead for over a century. Wait, why does no one want to invest in Ukraine? Putin…

  43. colliemum says:

    This: “And is anyone else curious why wealthy businessmen are accorded the status of minor gods in Kreakletown, while Vladimir Putin – alleged by the same social demographic to be the wealthiest man in Russia – is a shitheel they can’t wait to get rid of? Is it perhaps because they know he doesn’t really have any money?”
    (My bolding)
    Yes, they know, but it ‘doesn’t suit’ the ‘narrative’.
    Have you noticed that all these fine people who cry crocodile tears in all those russophobe publications, never mind twittering as well, have swallowed whole the insidious approach to politics instituted, afaik, by the UK’s Tony Blair and his henchman Peter Mandelson in 1997?
    This approach is about presenting the unsuspecting electorate with ‘a narrative’, so they can grasp the lofty idea coming from the politicians who are so desperate for their votes.
    It has now trickled down, as such things inevitably do, into the subconscious of hacks and is on show in the piece you’ve used for this excellent post, Mark.
    The narrative is that Russia would be fine if it were just like The West, and only Putin is the Greta Obstacle which must be overcome.
    Thus it doesn’t matter any longer to the Keaklies – be they in the West or the East – that what they write is hogwash with no connection to the actualité. The narrative has to be maintained at all costs.
    What they don’t notice, in their own echo chamber, is that more and more people outside are pointing fingers at them because they all are now not wearing new clothes but are as butt-naked as yon Emperor in yon proper old ‘narrative’, called fairytale …

    Great post again – thanks, mark!

    • colliemum says:

      ‘Mark’, innit!
      Sorry, no disrespect intended, just cold fingers on the keyboard …

      🙂

    • marknesop says:

      Thanks again, colliemum! If any of these leaders are still around in a position to direct resources when Putin finally retires, it will be interesting watching them scramble around trying to find his “hidden swag”. Surely he will claim it when he retires, and no longer has access to government properties to live in?

      But that’s a long time to wait, unless he dies first. I fully expect him to be reelected if he stands for another term, and it’s hard to imagine he won’t unless he’s dead.

Leave a comment