Apparently "Ukrainian nationalists" aren't allowed to vote in it. Transltion: If you're pro-Ukrainian, you shouldn't vote in the referrendum.
#RefferendumatGunpoint
Russia Discussion
- Thread starter iSparky
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Apparently "Ukrainian nationalists" aren't allowed to vote in it. Transltion: If you're pro-Ukrainian, you shouldn't vote in the referrendum.
#RefferendumatGunpoint
It's actually more than that. It was pretty much a typical propaganda article, with little substance.
For example, number 4, he keeps making circles with pointless arguments, without tackling the point itself, which is "Myth: 4- The revolution in Kiev was unconstitutional." It's not a myth, as the article itself showed by avoiding the point itself, deliberately. The "revolution" was unconstitutional, period.
If you want to talk about the legal grounds for the Russian "invasion" then that's another issue, and should be debated separately, keeping in mind that the "revolution" breached the constitution before anything else, which actually provides justification by itself if the constitution was breached again afterwards (the first to breach the constitution should be the one to blame the most), and I'm talking here about Crimea's decision to join Russia.
Also, it's ironic how he talks almost sarcastically in number 5 about the way the Crimean PM was chosen, even though that was actually the exact same way the current government in Kiev was installed. Let alone the way he tries to present himself as the one who knows exactly what the Crimean people want (without any facts of course) and even neglecting the fact that 80% of the elected Crimean parliament voted for joining Russia.
And then when he went on to mention Liz Wahl as some sort of "evidence" to support his article, it was pretty clear at what level the author was writing.
Its obviously an advocacy piece but the 5 points are all grounded in truth. On point 5, the idea that Crimeans suddenly want to be independent is a direct result of the paranoia campaign that has been fomented by Russian channels that are being piped into Crimea, the billboards such as the one I posted, along with the importing of Kosacks and unflagged Russian troops (to escape international law and proof of an invasion). This entire thing has been ginned up by the Kremlin as a pretext to legitimize an invasion. There are no fascists marauding about killing Russians in Crimea. Its all propaganda that's being made up by Moscow.
There are also the pro-Russian protesters who poured into Crimea and eastern Ukraine to serve as "grassroots" protesters. Hotels were full of people who came just to drum up support for Putin. Putin can say, "Look! All these people want to be Russian!" while ignoring that a number of them are already Russians. They are about as homegrown as the Tea Party is.
I'd have supposed that the presence of Russian bases already provided a deterrent factor of sorts to any extreme elements, and if the anxiety about Kiev's future actions was accurate then why not wait for such incontrovertible justification? Invite in the Western media, give them the guided tour if you will.
For all that a person may be part of the Russian speaking population in the Crimea, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd want to spurn what could be easier access to the EU with its economic benefits. If i were in there shoes, i believe i'd want an increased range of options for this referendum too. Its a rush job and a land grab, from here the interest lies with how NATO might prevent further such attempts by Putin. Sadly Europe is too compromised to take a lead or a strong stance.
For all that a person may be part of the Russian speaking population in the Crimea, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd want to spurn what could be easier access to the EU with its economic benefits. If i were in there shoes, i believe i'd want an increased range of options for this referendum too. Its a rush job and a land grab, from here the interest lies with how NATO might prevent further such attempts by Putin. Sadly Europe is too compromised to take a lead or a strong stance.
You can argue and give your opinion about it. I have no problem with that and some people have already made pretty much the same arguments here. But the way he presented the article, calling it the "top 5 myths", when you call them that then you're implying that you have the facts or evidences that support your statement. He didn't present many facts, and was pretty much presenting his own opinion about the situation, but at the same time not only refusing to listen to the other opinion, but going to the extreme of calling it a total "myth".
Point 5, I think even the people who are siding with the West here think that the Crimeans are more likely to choose Russia even in a free and totally democratic referendum. Calling that a flat out myth is stupid imo. He also failed like I said to give account to the fact that nearly 80% of the elected parliament actually took a position different to his.
I have no problem with him presenting his own subjective assessment of the situation, but to present the other opinions as "myths", without doing enough (imo) to justify that claim, makes the article in my view much closer to being mere propaganda, than a good piece of journalism.
If you look closer, its an editorial in the Moscow Times.
Good points. I spend a good bit of time in Ukraine and there are few people there who want to secede Ukrainian land to Russia; most people already speak Russian as their first language and are content with getting on with, and improving their lives. This entire thing is a massive overreaction from Putin because a European Ukraine threatens his plans to expand the Russian sphere, which is the real reason why he's fabricating paranoia in Crimea - as a pretext to get boots on the ground and annex new land. If allowed to go unchecked, there's no reason he won't do the same in the eastern and some southern parts of Ukraine.
For what its worth, I think there's a good chance Putin will back down in the end. EU economic sanctions will completely destabilize the Russian economy, which is already in bad shape; as will the ignominy of getting booted out of the G8. Its far too heavy a price to pay for a small piece of land that he already has access to, and at this point its just a matter of giving him a way of backing out that will cause him the least amount of humiliation at home.
So what? Are you saying the freedom of press in Russia is in a pretty good shape?
Economic sanctions will hurt Russia, and it doesn't look an easy step to me for Russia to allow Crimea to join it, but there is also a limit for what the sanctions can do (they couldn't for example force Iran to give up the enrichment of Uranium, till now at least).
So in my opinion it depends on how important it is for Russia to add Crimea to its land. If it's not that important, then may be Obama can pay Putin back for the 'Syria red line' favour.
So what? Are you saying the freedom of press in Russia is in a pretty good shape?
Economic sanctions will hurt Russia, and it doesn't look an easy step to me for Russia to allow Crimea to join it, but there is also a limit for what the sanctions can do (they couldn't for example force Iran to give up the enrichment of Uranium, till now at least).
So in my opinion it depends on how important it is for Russia to add Crimea to its land. If it's not that important, then may be Obama can pay Putin back for the 'Syria red line' favour.
No I'm saying you're overreacting to an editorial - its someone's opinion, that is quite spot on.
As for the sanctions, they would cripple Russia and make Putin look like a right mug to his own population. There's a reason Iran are desperate to negotiate their way out of their situation they're and Russia need not go down the same path for a small piece of land they already have access to.
I wasn't. I actually didn't even reply to it, until Red Dreams kept mentioning it like it was some sort of "damning evidence", that nobody can reply to, when it was no more than an opinion really.
Despite what's being said in the media, the reality is after all that fuss the West could have got a better deal from Iran in 2005, had they just accepted Iran's proposal at the time. True the sanctions were tough on Iran (and I don't think any sanctions remotely close to those would be force on Russia anyway), but in the end they still met (at least in the interim deal) much closer to Iran's initial position than the West's (with the crucial point being Iran's right to enrich Uranium inside its borders).
And like you said, if Russia views Crimea as a "small piece of land they already have access to", then it's likely that it won't risk adding it to its territory.
The referendum will take place, the Crimeans will vote to join Russia and there's not a single thing West can do to stop it. If you think that the threat of sanctions can make Putin back down in an issue such as this, then you have no idea what you're talking about. His rating is sky high at the moment and majority of Russians back him on the Ukraine stance.
The referendum will have no international legitimacy since it is being hurriedly carried out in a climate of intimidation, and as a pretext to annex a part of another country. There is no vigorous debate among citizens, civil society organizations, and within government that one might expect in an important referendum - as the entire thing is being carried out at gunpoint.
Ultimately Putin will have to weigh the cost/benefit of such an action. There's little to be gained for Russia to illegally annex a territory of another country, and one it already has access to via a bilateral agreement with Ukraine. Conversely, the cost of sanctions to the Russian economy would be crippling. The economy barely grew at 1.4% last year and stocks have fallen to the lowest point in 4 years. If the EU moves forward with trade sanctions it would undercut the Russian economy in a way that the self-centered pride of invading a small piece of land belonging to another country won't seem worth it. Ultimately, his actions will concede that he has severely miscalculated.
That highlighted sentence proves to me that you know very little about Russians and their pride. Giving Russians ultimatums never work, it only unites them against the enemies, real or imaginary. In fact, that's probably the only scenario, that will prompt most Russian citizens, including those not fond of Putin, to stand together.
EU depends on Russian gas, so the sanctions can go both ways, if it comes to that, but I doubt it will. I don't think Russia is going to invade the southeast of Ukraine, there's too much to lose for both sides, if it happens. Crimea is a different matter, it's a Russian land, with Russians counting for more than two-thirds of the population and is also a strategic point in the Black Sea where the fleet resides.
Putin deserves a lot of criticism for the way he runs his country, but in this case he has not only every right, but an obligation to protect Russia's interests. The coup was a tragic mistake on USA and EU part, they created a disaster, that will have long term negative consequences for millions of Ukrainians in the years to come. Toppling a corrupt ruler may have proved to be relatively easy, but I wonder, if they thought hard enough about what happens next. The country is on a brink of a civil war, and when it comes to economy, I seriously doubt that US or EU are ready to help to a degree that's really needed.
Last edited:
I'm quite familiar with Russians and "Russian Pride", Russian nationalism, and how compartmentalized it is from global norms and how people on the outside perceive them. After all, such an allegedly modernizing country requires a sufficient degree of ignorance to sustain its intolerant and self-important society. I also spend a lot of time in Ukraine, have many Ukrainian friends (both pro-Russian and not) who I speak with. The sanctions aren't an ultimatum, but merely a negotiating tool for Europe, the US and others to express their reaction of what's happening.
Who is to say whether Russia will invade the southeast of Ukraine or not ? Just six weeks go, few would have said they would attempt to invade and annex Crimea, and look what's happened. And as for Crimea - its Ukrainian land - legally and as recognized by the international system we live in. In addition to many so called "ethnic Russians", there are also a significant amount of Tartars and Russian speaking Ukrainians who live there and don't want to switch citizenship on Putin's behalf. And as previously mentioned, irrespective of the result, the referendum will have no international legitimacy as it is being undertaken in a way in which the result is guaranteed in order to suit Putin's geopolitical objectives rather than the well being of Crimean citizens.
As for the natural gas angle - it won't matter much as the U.S. is now a leading natural gas producer and can make up for the losses by exporting LNG to European regasification terminals for next winter (if needed). Therefore the only significant impact of sanctions will be Russia's inability to import the goods it heavily relies on from the EU. The deeper you look at the issue, the more inescapable the conclusion that Putin will have to back down sooner or later, as there is no end game that will benefit more than than hurt him or Russia's long term interests.
Observers from 21 Countries to Attend Crimean Referendum
SIMFEROPOL, March 14 (RIA Novosti) – Election observers from more than 21 countries, including the United States, are registered to attend a referendum on Sunday in Ukraine’s Crimea on secession and annexation by Russia, the chairman of the election commission said Thursday.
Mikhail Malyshev told reporters that 50 politicians and observers from 21 countries – including the United States, Israel, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Greece – have been registered to attend the referendum, widely expected to pave the way for the annexation of the region by Moscow.
In Sunday's vote, residents in the majority Russian-speaking Crimea will be given two options: uniting with Russia or remaining in Ukraine with expanded autonomy.
Malyshev said that the first exit poll results will be released on Monday and that ballots have already been distributed to regional election offices.
The Ukrainian parliament earlier said ballots will be provided in the Ukrainian, Russian and Tatar languages.
The election chairman added that more than 1.52 million people are eligible to vote. According to official figures, as of January the total population of Crimea was 1.96 million, including children below the voting age.
That figure does not include residents in the port city of Sevastopol, home to nearly 380,000 people and a major Russian naval base, which has its own election authority.
The parliament of Crimea declared independence from Ukraine on Tuesday, adding in its statement that if the popular vote passes the country will become independent and will immediately request annexation by Moscow.
Officials in Crimea, which hosts a major Russian naval base, have refused to recognize as legitimate the country’s new leadership that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych on February 22 following months of street demonstrations protesting his step back from closer ties with Europe.
Authorities in Kiev and international leaders have condemned the upcoming referendum as illegitimate and lashed out at the Kremlin for violating international law in attempting to annex the region.
Crimean Prime Minister Sergei Aksyonov said Monday via his Twitter feed that the referendum is expected to cost some $1.8 million.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140314/188...1-Countries-to-Attend-Crimean-Referendum.html
SIMFEROPOL, March 14 (RIA Novosti) – Election observers from more than 21 countries, including the United States, are registered to attend a referendum on Sunday in Ukraine’s Crimea on secession and annexation by Russia, the chairman of the election commission said Thursday.
Mikhail Malyshev told reporters that 50 politicians and observers from 21 countries – including the United States, Israel, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Greece – have been registered to attend the referendum, widely expected to pave the way for the annexation of the region by Moscow.
In Sunday's vote, residents in the majority Russian-speaking Crimea will be given two options: uniting with Russia or remaining in Ukraine with expanded autonomy.
Malyshev said that the first exit poll results will be released on Monday and that ballots have already been distributed to regional election offices.
The Ukrainian parliament earlier said ballots will be provided in the Ukrainian, Russian and Tatar languages.
The election chairman added that more than 1.52 million people are eligible to vote. According to official figures, as of January the total population of Crimea was 1.96 million, including children below the voting age.
That figure does not include residents in the port city of Sevastopol, home to nearly 380,000 people and a major Russian naval base, which has its own election authority.
The parliament of Crimea declared independence from Ukraine on Tuesday, adding in its statement that if the popular vote passes the country will become independent and will immediately request annexation by Moscow.
Officials in Crimea, which hosts a major Russian naval base, have refused to recognize as legitimate the country’s new leadership that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych on February 22 following months of street demonstrations protesting his step back from closer ties with Europe.
Authorities in Kiev and international leaders have condemned the upcoming referendum as illegitimate and lashed out at the Kremlin for violating international law in attempting to annex the region.
Crimean Prime Minister Sergei Aksyonov said Monday via his Twitter feed that the referendum is expected to cost some $1.8 million.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20140314/188...1-Countries-to-Attend-Crimean-Referendum.html
Yes, how dare they to be so intolerant and ignorant, too bad, you can't 'shock and awe' them into an American brand of democracy, it worked so well in Iraq and other places you spread your goodwill at.
Being that US and EU are all about democracy and freedom, I'm sure they should approve of Crimean citizens's right to decide which country they want to be a part of. Unless, of course, they only use those terms when they suit their geopolitical interests, in which case, for all I care, they can shove the international legitimacy argument up their asses.
Not true.
http://time.com/14829/america-cant-fix-europes-russian-energy-problem/
http://www.stltoday.com/business/lo...cle_bf382e01-5228-5688-8460-ca4d8818d6d0.html
I'm sure the Crimean citizens may well end up deciding their future under legitimate circumstances, rather than being coerced to do so at gunpoint to meet Putin's timeline. As for the LNG issue, the US can easily expedite plans that were already underway to export LNG as the issue of weaning Europe of reliance from Russia is not new.
If Putin gambles by thinking he can balance EU trade sanctions by playing the natural gas card, he is going to end up losing as Europe can diversity its imports of Gas but Russia can't do the same for the European goods it imports. It would suffocate the Russian economy very quickly.
Of course Putin could easily deescalate this by removing his troops (the ones he claims don't exist) from Crimean streets, negotiating a settlement with the Ukrainian authorities, and allowing Ukrainians the right of moving of developing their own new Government through elections.
If you care so much about legitimacy, why not denounce the current Ukrainian government, that came to power by a way of an anti constitutional coup? Who elected that clown Yatzeniuk? I must have missed the election or referendum, that gave him the power to represent the country of 45 million people. Compared to what happened with the blessing and active help of US State Department and EU in Kiev, Crimean referendum is actually a democratic event.
Again, concerning the gas and the sanctions issues. It's a wishful thinking on your part to expect US to expedite the LNG export, as those articles explain, it's not doable for several reasons and, at best, will take years to implement . We're not talking years, we're talking what you can do right now.The sanctions will hurt both sides and ultimately will set the East - West relations decades back.
The current government in Kiev didn't wait to topple Yanukovich under legitimate circumstances, so why should the Crimeans do? The Crimeans don't trust the current illegitimate government, just like the current government in Kiev claimed that they didn't trust the elected Yanukovich, to justify breaching the constitution and toppling him by force.
EDIT: I see antihenry made the same point.
If US didn't directly interfere in the affairs of another sovereign country, there wouldn't be any need to deescalate anything. Americans and their western European buddies created this mess.
Last edited:
Actually, the US and to a lesser extent the EU, weren't too bothered about any of this until Putin began his authoritarian drift, started playing power politics with natural gas, cracking down on internal dissent, clamping down on civil society and human rights. Obviously the West is going to object to that sort of thing by balancing through supporting nations like Ukraine. Putin obviously wants Ukraine to be a part of the Russian sphere and is willing to invade if they do otherwise.
Thanks to an intense fear mongering campaign by the Kremlin to scare Crimeans that The Nazis are coming.
There's a difference in circumstances. The protests, much as with other places where they have happened in the past few years, began by people demanding less corruption and better governance. Once the government begins shooting its citizens, it tends to lose a bit of legitimacy in terms of being able to credibly negotiate a solution and the situation quickly reached a tipping point.
Should I be concerned about denouncing the fact that someone who diverted billions from the Ukrainian budget towards his own accounts/interests was forced to flee to save his own skin ? Not a chance.
So the Crimeans are as paranoid the people who were saying Assad is fighting Al-Qaeda in Syria? Excuse me for having doubts when the West attempts to underplay the negatives of something they like. Even a member in the German parliament (the leader of the biggest bloc in the opposition) have expressed yesterday his concern about the fascist threat in Ukraine under the current government.
And by the way, whatever happened to that argument that people who live there know better? And we're not talking here about a single person posting on a forum, but about all the people deciding what they want for themselves in a democratic way. Suddenly they're all misled?
They do know better and have the right to decide their own future, which is precisely why they shouldn't be holding a referendum to help justify Putin's invasion. If there is a legitimate referendum, it should be held months into the future and be inclusive where all parties who support or oppose it have adequate access to debate their positions, rather than this contrived theatre where everyone already knows the result before it happens.
The Ukrainian government has already given an order to dissolve the elected Crimean parliament too (imagine what would have happened if the buildings in Crimea weren't better secured than the ones in Kiev).
More time would not allow for "debate", but for the new un-elected government to take more control, and make more illegitimate decisions to prevent the referendum from happening, or to control it completely. And the way it installed itself makes it pretty clear that the current government don't actually respect legality, or even the constitution for that matter, and least of all, "debate".
It's still unclear who were those mysterious snipers that shot protesters. The new regime doesn't seem to be too bothered about investigating it, either. Personally, I don't see what Yanukovich could possibly gain from it, while the opposition certainly did.
Regardless of what a corrupt scumbag Yanukovich is, he's a democratically elected president of the country, and he was deposed by anti constitutional means, with full American support. After he'd signed an agreement to meet all the opposition demands, in the presence of envoys from Germany, France and Poland, the European Union and the United States, which have backed the opposition throughout the crisis, "have welcomed the moves and called for their swift implementation."
http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-presidency-agreement-eu-cautious/25272042.html
So, what happens next? The opposition doesn't honor the agreement, overthrows the president and US and EU somehow don't see anything wrong with it and continue to support the "leaders" that they "elected". I wonder why.
So basically, Americans will decide, what suits their agenda at any given moment and will back any side they see fit, just like they did with those "freedom fighters" in Syria. Not that it's news to anyone, who hasn't been in a coma for the last few decades, but I'm surprised there are actually people out there, who still believe USA are anything, but a bully, who hides behind freedom and democracy public declarations, while trying to bend everyone and everything to their will, by any means necessary.
That's pretty much how the international system works. The most powerful states pursue their own interests. In this case, its a matter of whether America and Europe's power can suppress Russia's desire to expand its sphere of influence. This explains why countries like the US support democratic movements in some countries and not so much in others. At its core, this is a conflict of power and ideas among the so called great powers of the world.
Actually more time would also allow for legitimate national elections to take place, followed by the election of a new government, and a proper referendum where Ukrainian citizens can decide these things for themselves. Ideally, this would have happened without Yanukovych fleeing in his helicopter, but it should nonetheless still happen. What certainly shouldn't happen is the illegitimate farce that is going to take place in Crimea on Sunday with no debate or opposition opinion allowed.
Save some words for what happened in Kiev.
By the way, the elected Crimean parliament already debated about it, and took the decision that is best for their people.
Its illegitimate because its being done quickly, with no debate, and at the behest of Putin's interest of annexing the territory. Crimea officially belongs to Ukraine and any referendum should be done in the national interests of Ukrainian citizens, not for Putin or any outside entity.
This is a short version of what transpired in Ukraine.
http://coub.com/view/u5p8
http://coub.com/view/u5p8
Russian propaganda war in full swing over Ukraine
http://news.yahoo.com/russian-propaganda-war-full-swing-over-ukraine-085411498.html
MOSCOW (AP) — This is Ukraine today, at least as seen by most Russian news media: the government is run by anti-Semitic fascists, people killed in protests were shot by opposition snipers and the West is behind it all.
And the room to disagree with that portrayal is getting smaller by the week.
With Crimea set to hold a referendum Sunday on whether to merge with Russia, the push to demonize Ukraine's leadership has reached fever pitch. Authorities in Ukraine have responded by blocking Russian TV channels.
Lev Gudkov, head of a respected independent Moscow-based polling agency, says the propagandist tone of Russian state television has reached new levels.
"For intensity, comprehensiveness and aggressiveness, this is like nothing I have ever seen over the whole post-Soviet period," Gudkov said.
News bulletins on top network Channel 1 carry extensive reports detailing purported rampant lawlessness to vague threats of reprisals against ethnic Russians and Jews, as well as showing interviews with talking heads alleging foreign-engineered plots.
NTV, owned by gas giant Gazprom's media arm, on Thursday aired a report about purportedly hacked email correspondence between U.S. and Ukrainian officials on plans for staging an attack on military jets. The piece goes on to claim that the incident was to serve as an excuse for the United States to take military action against Russia.
It is steadily becoming conventional wisdom in the most widely watched news shows that those shot dead during protests in Kiev last month were victims of shadowy figures possibly hired by opposition forces.
Right Sector, a radical ultranationalist group that spearheaded the most violent assaults against riot police, is a subject of scaremongering daily exposes. For all the attention it has received, the group has not been granted any posts in the new government and observers say it has little actual clout.
Late Thursday night, clashes broke out in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk between government supporters and a hostile pro-Russian crowd. At one point a pro-Russian mob encircled and threw objects at a small huddle of people, shouting for them to get on their knees. At least one person died in the turmoil.
Rossiya-1, another state station, on the same evening reported that the incident had been provoked by "special forces" of the Maidan, the informal name of the movement that brought about last month's ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych.
Ukraine's pushback against the Kremlin-led smear campaign has not been much more sophisticated.
Broadcast authorities there on Tuesday ordered the suspension of the signal of Russian state-controlled television stations — a move that drew swift indignation from Moscow and international media advocacy groups alike.
People in Russia's provinces, where Internet penetration is weak, are particularly prone to one-sided information.
"The only sources of information there are the federal television stations, and they have been conducting an exercise in brainwashing," Gudkov said.
In Crimea, one of the two TV stations allowed to broadcast keeps repeating a clip that displays the slogan "March 16: Together with Russia" while blaring the Russian national anthem.
The only other TV station broadcasting there is ATR, run by representatives of the peninsula's Crimean Tatar community which supports the government in Kiev. The channel, which has a "United Country" logo, has shown regular on-the-street interviews with people explaining that they want Crimea to remain part of Ukraine.
Many journalists on the ground covering events in Crimea have faced intimidation and assaults from members of pro-Russian militia forces, further complicating efforts to report a fuller picture.
A recent survey published this week by Gudkov's Levada Center appears to show the propaganda campaign has had the desired effect in Russia. Asked if there were grounds for Russia deploying troops to Crimea, which has an ethnic Russian majority, 43 percent of respondents said a military response was justified because people there were at risk of attack from "bandits and nationalists." Another 28 percent agreed on the threat, but suggested a political solution would be preferable.
There have been no signs people in Crimea are facing threats.
Dissenting Russians have turned to online sources for alternative viewpoints, including on current developments in Ukraine, but an unfolding crackdown on Internet news outlets looks set to stem that flow.
On Wednesday, the owner of leading independent news website Lenta.ru fired its chief editor, Galina Timchenko, following official complaints over the outlet's coverage of Ukraine.
The communications regulator said Lenta.ru breached a law banning dissemination of extremist material by linking to comments by Dmytro Yarosh, a nationalist Ukrainian leader wanted in Russia on charges of instigating terrorism.
Ominously for online outlets, closure of websites deemed to contain "extremist" material or incitements to join unauthorized rallies can as of this year be closed without a court order.
One day after the Lenta.ru editor was fired, a handful of websites notable for their criticism of the government, and a blog run by prominent opposition leader Alexei Navalny, were summarily banned on a request from prosecutors.
"Russian authorities are unabashedly cleansing the media landscape of independent voices that have the power to shape minds," said Committee to Protect Journalists representative Nina Ognianova. "We condemn this ban on alternative sources of news and opinion, and call on Moscow to cease this Soviet-style crackdown."
Less than half of Russia's adult population uses the Internet on a daily basis, but the sight of commuters in Moscow and other major cities glued to their smartphones suggests that is changing.
"The authorities are increasingly interested in the generation that looks much more at the Internet," said Sergei Buntman, deputy editor of liberal-leaning Ekho Moskvy radio station, whose website was also momentarily blocked by major providers overnight Thursday.
"Turning off sources of information to skeptics is probably the main goal of this drumbeat of propaganda that there has been since the events in Ukraine," Buntman said.
http://news.yahoo.com/russian-propaganda-war-full-swing-over-ukraine-085411498.html
MOSCOW (AP) — This is Ukraine today, at least as seen by most Russian news media: the government is run by anti-Semitic fascists, people killed in protests were shot by opposition snipers and the West is behind it all.
And the room to disagree with that portrayal is getting smaller by the week.
With Crimea set to hold a referendum Sunday on whether to merge with Russia, the push to demonize Ukraine's leadership has reached fever pitch. Authorities in Ukraine have responded by blocking Russian TV channels.
Lev Gudkov, head of a respected independent Moscow-based polling agency, says the propagandist tone of Russian state television has reached new levels.
"For intensity, comprehensiveness and aggressiveness, this is like nothing I have ever seen over the whole post-Soviet period," Gudkov said.
News bulletins on top network Channel 1 carry extensive reports detailing purported rampant lawlessness to vague threats of reprisals against ethnic Russians and Jews, as well as showing interviews with talking heads alleging foreign-engineered plots.
NTV, owned by gas giant Gazprom's media arm, on Thursday aired a report about purportedly hacked email correspondence between U.S. and Ukrainian officials on plans for staging an attack on military jets. The piece goes on to claim that the incident was to serve as an excuse for the United States to take military action against Russia.
It is steadily becoming conventional wisdom in the most widely watched news shows that those shot dead during protests in Kiev last month were victims of shadowy figures possibly hired by opposition forces.
Right Sector, a radical ultranationalist group that spearheaded the most violent assaults against riot police, is a subject of scaremongering daily exposes. For all the attention it has received, the group has not been granted any posts in the new government and observers say it has little actual clout.
Late Thursday night, clashes broke out in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk between government supporters and a hostile pro-Russian crowd. At one point a pro-Russian mob encircled and threw objects at a small huddle of people, shouting for them to get on their knees. At least one person died in the turmoil.
Rossiya-1, another state station, on the same evening reported that the incident had been provoked by "special forces" of the Maidan, the informal name of the movement that brought about last month's ouster of President Viktor Yanukovych.
Ukraine's pushback against the Kremlin-led smear campaign has not been much more sophisticated.
Broadcast authorities there on Tuesday ordered the suspension of the signal of Russian state-controlled television stations — a move that drew swift indignation from Moscow and international media advocacy groups alike.
People in Russia's provinces, where Internet penetration is weak, are particularly prone to one-sided information.
"The only sources of information there are the federal television stations, and they have been conducting an exercise in brainwashing," Gudkov said.
In Crimea, one of the two TV stations allowed to broadcast keeps repeating a clip that displays the slogan "March 16: Together with Russia" while blaring the Russian national anthem.
The only other TV station broadcasting there is ATR, run by representatives of the peninsula's Crimean Tatar community which supports the government in Kiev. The channel, which has a "United Country" logo, has shown regular on-the-street interviews with people explaining that they want Crimea to remain part of Ukraine.
Many journalists on the ground covering events in Crimea have faced intimidation and assaults from members of pro-Russian militia forces, further complicating efforts to report a fuller picture.
A recent survey published this week by Gudkov's Levada Center appears to show the propaganda campaign has had the desired effect in Russia. Asked if there were grounds for Russia deploying troops to Crimea, which has an ethnic Russian majority, 43 percent of respondents said a military response was justified because people there were at risk of attack from "bandits and nationalists." Another 28 percent agreed on the threat, but suggested a political solution would be preferable.
There have been no signs people in Crimea are facing threats.
Dissenting Russians have turned to online sources for alternative viewpoints, including on current developments in Ukraine, but an unfolding crackdown on Internet news outlets looks set to stem that flow.
On Wednesday, the owner of leading independent news website Lenta.ru fired its chief editor, Galina Timchenko, following official complaints over the outlet's coverage of Ukraine.
The communications regulator said Lenta.ru breached a law banning dissemination of extremist material by linking to comments by Dmytro Yarosh, a nationalist Ukrainian leader wanted in Russia on charges of instigating terrorism.
Ominously for online outlets, closure of websites deemed to contain "extremist" material or incitements to join unauthorized rallies can as of this year be closed without a court order.
One day after the Lenta.ru editor was fired, a handful of websites notable for their criticism of the government, and a blog run by prominent opposition leader Alexei Navalny, were summarily banned on a request from prosecutors.
"Russian authorities are unabashedly cleansing the media landscape of independent voices that have the power to shape minds," said Committee to Protect Journalists representative Nina Ognianova. "We condemn this ban on alternative sources of news and opinion, and call on Moscow to cease this Soviet-style crackdown."
Less than half of Russia's adult population uses the Internet on a daily basis, but the sight of commuters in Moscow and other major cities glued to their smartphones suggests that is changing.
"The authorities are increasingly interested in the generation that looks much more at the Internet," said Sergei Buntman, deputy editor of liberal-leaning Ekho Moskvy radio station, whose website was also momentarily blocked by major providers overnight Thursday.
"Turning off sources of information to skeptics is probably the main goal of this drumbeat of propaganda that there has been since the events in Ukraine," Buntman said.
Russia says intercepted US drone over Crimea: arms group
Moscow (AFP) - A United States surveillance drone has been intercepted above the Ukranian region of Crimea, a Russian state arms and technology group said Friday.
"The drone was flying at about 4,000 metres (12,000 feet) and was virtually invisible from the ground. It was possible to break the link with US operators with complex radio-electronic" technology, said Rostec in a statement.
The drone fell "almost intact into the hands of self-defence forces" added Rostec, which said it had manufactured the equipment used to down the aircraft, but did not specify who was operating it.
"Judging by its identification number, UAV MQ-5B belonged to the 66th American Reconnaissance Brigade, based in Bavaria," Rostec said on its website, which also carried a picture of what it said was the captured drone.
The photograph appeared to show an apparently armed drone in flight, rather than debris.
The Crimean port of Sevastopol is home to Russia's Black Sea Fleet, which is believed to be equipped with detection equipment.
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-intercepted-us-drone-over-crimea-arms-180430584.html
-----------------
I guess Obama will have to ask for another drone to be returned...
Moscow (AFP) - A United States surveillance drone has been intercepted above the Ukranian region of Crimea, a Russian state arms and technology group said Friday.
"The drone was flying at about 4,000 metres (12,000 feet) and was virtually invisible from the ground. It was possible to break the link with US operators with complex radio-electronic" technology, said Rostec in a statement.
The drone fell "almost intact into the hands of self-defence forces" added Rostec, which said it had manufactured the equipment used to down the aircraft, but did not specify who was operating it.
"Judging by its identification number, UAV MQ-5B belonged to the 66th American Reconnaissance Brigade, based in Bavaria," Rostec said on its website, which also carried a picture of what it said was the captured drone.
The photograph appeared to show an apparently armed drone in flight, rather than debris.
The Crimean port of Sevastopol is home to Russia's Black Sea Fleet, which is believed to be equipped with detection equipment.
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-intercepted-us-drone-over-crimea-arms-180430584.html
-----------------
I guess Obama will have to ask for another drone to be returned...
So, what's Putin's justification for attacking a US plane in a third country outside of Russia's airspace?
Fair enough.
Russia unsurprisingly vetoed the UNSC resolution invalidating the referendum in Crimea. China abstained and the other 13 nations voted in favor.