rigorousintuition.ca

semper occultus wrote:possibly an intellectual hang-over from Marxist ideology.

there is a striking congruence between orthodox eastern bloc marxist historians' view of say Nazism vs a "deep-political" western perspective

The political scientists Carl Friedrich and Zbigniew Brzezinski ( say no more ) were primarily responsible for expanding the usage of the term in university social science and professional research, reformulating it as a paradigm for the communist Soviet Union as well as fascist regimes.

There is a growing wave of commentary about the rise of new and competitive players in the global English-language media sphere. Traditional outlets in the US, UK and Canada are scrambling for market share like never before; they are scared, and with good reason.

The Russians, Chinese, French, the Emir of Qatar and even the Iranians are giving the native English speakers in the news industry a run for their money. Great - competition is good and healthy! Yet many in the US and the UK are calling the new kids on the block upstarts for challenging the status quo, being anti-American and being anti-Western in general.

Russia has been singled out more than others and RT television, my employer, has been harshly criticised for reporting that has been less than kind about America's domestic realities and foreign policy. This is unwarranted: RT and other new English-language outlets are merely providing the Anglosphere with new and different voices.

Since the end of World War II and particularly after the Cold War, the US has seen itself as the beacon of good in the world. This is the narrative Americans are taught early on, and it is reinforced incessantly.

Sadly, the vast majority of Americans get their news from US media only, especially domestic television. These outlets limit and control public debate and devote precious little time to foreign news. In fact, it is exceptional when an American media outlet does not mirror an editorial line established from above.
The charge that Russian media is anti-American is quite overblown. Russian English-language media, including RT, do indeed report stories rarely found in the US mainstream - and often from a viewpoint rarely found there as well. No one should be surprised by this. Why should the definition of free speech be determined by a Western capital?

The US badmouths the entire world when it suits its own purposes. In the American mainstream Israel has long been protected, Iraq was once the world's enemy, and now Iran is. Russia refuses to kowtow to western geopolitical and economic interests, so it is covered in the worst possible light. Meanwhile, American-sponsored autocrats and dictators are given a free pass.

For decades Washington and America's media establishment have dumbed down political debate at home - and expected the rest of the world to follow. When this does not happen, it is called anti-Americanism.

This is the standard hypocrisy of a country that habitually lectures others about media freedoms. While this isn't new, the fact that it is now drawing multi-viewpoint commentary in English is.

It is a pity when critique is only understood as criticism. America and the West generally must learn that their sense of humanity-saving exceptionalism is only a myth, and a very dangerous one. No peoples or countries have a monopoly on the truth.

This article was first published at http://www.mn.ru
http://rt.com/About_Us/Blogs/Untimely_T ... ?fullstory

Montag wrote:8bit, Sweejak,
I'm sorry Webster Tarpley, Wayne Madsen, present the Russian view? The Russian view is online btw, read the Moscow Times or Ria Novosti, their presentation is different than RT, and doesn't get into the deep political stuff.

When I asked this question, for some reason it brought to my mind when Chomsky was not allowed into Israel... His response to the guard who didn't let him, was that, "No government likes what I have to say." I've never really thought that Chomsky might be a disinfo person before that...

Yes Chomsky says he is an anarchist, and he wants the abolition of all governments, but I think the deep political perspective is even more threatening than the anarchist one to the governments of the world. I really don't see any government trying to promote people getting more savvy about the "behind the curtain" manipulations of this world. I'd think any government would wants it citizens (and even citizens of other countries) as in the dark on this as possible. It's to not let sleeping dogs lie, essentially.

Montag wrote:8bit, Sweejak,
I'm sorry Webster Tarpley, Wayne Madsen, present the Russian view? The Russian view is online btw, read the Moscow Times or Ria Novosti, their presentation is different than RT, and doesn't get into the deep political stuff.

When I asked this question, for some reason it brought to my mind when Chomsky was not allowed into Israel... His response to the guard who didn't let him, was that, "No government likes what I have to say." I've never really thought that Chomsky might be a disinfo person before that...

Yes Chomsky says he is an anarchist, and he wants the abolition of all governments, but I think the deep political perspective is even more threatening than the anarchist one to the governments of the world. I really don't see any government trying to promote people getting more savvy about the "behind the curtain" manipulations of this world. I'd think any government would wants it citizens (and even citizens of other countries) as in the dark on this as possible. It's to not let sleeping dogs lie, essentially.

Sweejak wrote:The Alex Jones Channel? Please, and Al Jazeera is Bin Laden's channel.

RT gets kudos for putting people on it's network that would never get on US MSM, it's a much needed corrective and it makes no secret that it exists for the US market in order to further Russia's viewpoint, which is also a much needed corrective for over 50 years of anti-Soviet propaganda that shifts into anti Russian propaganda seamlessly.

There are 2 RT's, RT and RT America. You'll find Jones, Madsen and Tarpley, Thom Hartmann, McGovern and many others frequently on RTA, but let's see who else is on the racier RTA, today my inbox has Dr. Jae-Jung Suh discussing the Kkorean torpedo false flag and Richard Dieter talking about the death penalty. Not exactly household names, and a story about a US Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen who wants to kick the Palestinian diplomats out of the US and interviews Adam Shapiro of the Free Gaza Movement about it. You US TV watchers, is there anything about that?

RT hosts some interesting stories that I don't think make it on the air, some are critical of things that happen in Russia, including analysis of the duopoly of Medvedev and Putin, Russia's failure to modernize, the efforts of trying to create civil society, meaning one where law is taken seriously, police corruption etc, but, IMO, they steer clear of direct attacks on the elites. Evgeny Khruschev has video log that is pretty interesting, given that it is from a a former Colonel who fought in Afghanistan. http://rt.com/About_Us/Blogs/friendly-f ... 07-26.html

I have a hard time supporting the Russian government, simply for the insane amount of evil they committed in Chechnya from 1999-2007, and the staged events that got them in there.

From: Andy
Subject: RE: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

Gorby did not have a VVP as a straight jacket….

Best regards,

****************************************

Begin forwarded message:
From:
Subject: Re: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

Medvedev is a lethal dummy. Words have meanings as we all know. A pompous air head who runs his mouth spewing like a parrot whatever Obama tells him to repeat spells possible unintended consequences, like an attack on Iran! Its in RF neighborhood the dumb fool -- "Intentional" U.S. spillover forty five miles across and onto RF territory or via U.S.sphere of influence RF ex Soviet border states?. -- Recall U.S, "W" Your are either with us or against us.".got a number of so-called allies to sign up to assist the U.S. "invasion" of Iraq that "W" knew had 'no' WMD, Navy, Air Force, subs,carriers, tanks, etc. you get the picture. U.S."Shock and Awe" was like shooting fish in a barrel. U.S got the chance to "live test" all their new lethal war toys along with the old. -- Sandra

****************************************

Begin forwarded message:

From: Tony
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

The S-300 isn't a silver bullet by itself but it would significantly
improve the already existing Iranian AD network, which BTW is fairly
good. They've got a number of Russian & Chinese origin SAM systems on top of their Western systems (inherited from the Shah). All of them have gone through various domestic upgrades. A recent assesment of Iranian Air-Defense below:

Reassessing Iran's Air Defences

Ongoing disagreements between the Western alliance and Iran over that nation's illicit nuclear materials program have fuelled considerable speculation in recent weeks over the possibility of Israeli or US led air strikes against Iran's nuclear industrial base. Should this outcome arise, attacking aircraft will have to overcome a disparate but rapidly modernising Integrated Air Defence System (IADS)....

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-170710-1.html

In regards to Israel going in alone, I go with the view that it
doesn't have the capability for a sustained air campaign (which is
what would be needed) over such distances. It would take virtually the entire Israeli Airforce to mount a large scale operation (not just
bombers but tankers, support aircraft, fighter cover and so on). I
don't think they could keep up that sort of tempo for more than a
couple of days. Everybody forgets that the Iranians have around
150-200 fighter aircraft....not as technologically advanced as the
Israeli ones but they still have to be dealt with on top of the ground
based SAMs.

****************************************

Begin forwarded message:

From: Alex
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

Tony

I agree. Looking at the notorious S-300 deal, one would think it is
the only factor deterring Israel. Eg. this (or many other sources)
http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=48786 says that the sale is not forbidden (2) S-300 can be replaced with something else. While we owe many problems to Gorbachov, he was, probably, a good man (i.e. not only a businessman in the government position - he just was not exactly the one for the job he tried to do. But Medevedev - I don't know. But I remember time when nobody believed Putin was worth anything....

The Iranians will need tests to develop meaningful nuclear
capabilities & that alone may trigger bad reaction. I read somewhere
they participated in N Korean tests, though.

Cheers

Igor,

****************************************
Begin forwarded message:

From: "Tony
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

One more thing....

IMO, Medvedev is another Gorbachev....in other words a DUMMY. So his comments re: Iran (and a host of other topics) should be taken in that context.

****************************************
Begin forwarded message:

From: "Tony
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

Igor,

China also voted for the sanctions. I think Russia and China decided
that all that could be done with a difficult situation was to support
a set of watered down sanctions. But Russia has gone further by
refusing to honour the S-300 deal which is a mistake and for which it will pay a significant price down the line (financial and political).
If you've noticed, Iran is criticising Russia loudly but hasn't said
anything against China.

An attack on Iran won't be a walk in the park which is why nothing has happened so far. Israel probably can't do it by itself for practical
reasons (distance, not enough aircraft for a sustainable attack and
Iranian reprisals). And the US wouldn't want to start another war with the Iraq and Afghanistan operations ongoing.

Personally I think Iran will develop the capability to quickly produce
nuclear weapons but won't actually produce any. That way they will
achieve most of their political goals but won't cross any red lines.
There are credible reports that Iran was involved in the North Korean tests and already has the necessary data without itself conducting a test.

****************************************
Begin forwarded message:

From: Alex
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

..there was an interesting detail in the Falgenhauer's text:

"The cancelling of the S-300 sale <..> **has financially hurt** influential officials and caused anger.

Friedmanists' wildest dream - a (in this case - the Russian)
Government as a nuclear-armed **private** business enterprise...
(the state police and courts it seems are already running in this
mode)

Some time ago I posted easy-going general speculations on other (than private business interests) ways the Russian government could be manipulated to do what US wants:

http://unpublished-notes.blogspot.com/2 ... -sits.html

Cheers

Igor,
****************************************

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Sergei,
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

Cassandra, it's tough for Russia to maintain any resemblance of
independent foreign policy since Russian elites keep their kids and
money in Western banks.

Sergei

****************************************

From: Cassandra
Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

@SJ

Unfortunately your url does not directly contradict stuff i know:

(1) The russians have plans to sell petroleum products to iran. There
is no obligation or hard intention to do so. On the contrary consider
the behaviour of

Lukoil: They pulled out.


(2) Medvedev continues to waffle.: His latest statetement on Iran was
completely uncalled for and gratuitous. Meantime RT tried to dispell
the effects by haveing other spokesmen make statements in the opposite
direction.


@Andy

(i) Some days ago i read that the american and israeli military were
in Azerbaijan.: Cosidering various airfields as to suitability of
stationing of planes for the campaign.

(ii) The PR dissimulation campaign is in full swing. Consider:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LG03Ak01.html or

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LG01Ak01.html

If you google both of these fellows you will find that they are
probably paid rumor mongers --- dissimulators.

It looks as if the most likely path of attack will come through the
Caucasus. Can russia countenance an attakck from Azerbaijan?


****************************************

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Andy
Subject: RE: Russian Policies in Iran

There is NO CHANCE IN THE WORLD that Russia would attack Iran in the present
domestic situation.

Best regards,


****************************************

Begin forwarded message:


Subject: Re: Russian Policies in Iran

Nothing new in this article except except a defense analyst impression from connecting "dots of events." The BBC and ilk are known for "floating" untruths and half-truths on behalf of the US. Does anyone remember UK PM blatantly false Iraqi intelligence given to former US President George W. Bush?. The new PM has shown [first US-Obama visit] he won't be bullied by Obama, US Congressional BP/Libya investigation "invitation" US press, etc. The new PM made clear during the US press conference sanding next to Obama they needed to ask Libya and Scotland regarding the questions they were asking him and not to confuse BP and the two events. He literally set the tone! No US-lapdog [hopefully]. Sandra

This totally dispelles the BBC article
Read the entire article at: http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russia. ... ns.999.htm.

had trouble attaching the "active" link may or may not work.
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russia_ ... s_999.html

****************************************

Begin forwarded message:

From: Cassandra
Subject: Russian Policies in Iran


Came across this piece by Falgehauer On Iran:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10684110


Usually i don't pay much attention to what this fellow says.

But given Medvedev's latest comments i am beginning to ask myself to what extend the present admin would countenance an attack on Iran. Who are the people in the israeli lobby in Moscow? The Iranian? This is not simply a weapons story. Is Hahn's latest post on a coup from above meanungful? Ideas/

8bitagent wrote:
I have a hard time supporting the Russian government, simply for the insane amount of evil they committed in Chechnya from 1999-2007, and the staged events that got them in there.
But I see RT as more of just an alternative media channel than anything promoting Russian politics.