Continuation - Ukraine erupts in riots and general strikes

[...] the line was in those versions even though anyone can simply check for themselves that it isn't.


You're wrong on that. The unsourced section with the claims in question has been on the undated page of that spam website designed to make money since at least mid-March. It was removed shortly before the Ukrainian blogger started his stunt (claiming that it was "news" and "Russian censors" removed it) that made some more cash thanks to the distribution by gullible media and their willing and inept parrots.

If we can believe the Russian activist, somebody actively brought it to the attention of interested parties including him (who smelled it). Not unlikely there's some "Putin troll" laughing his rear end off over this (and buying some vodka on Forbes readers' expense).
 
You're wrong on that. The unsourced section with the claims in question has been on the undated page of that spam website designed to make money since at least mid-March. It was removed shortly before the Ukrainian blogger started his stunt (claiming that it was "news" and "Russian censors" removed it) that made some more cash thanks to the distribution by gullible media and their willing and inept parrots.

Yes, but McHrozni claimed it was in all versions but the last one (which in context is the second one of 24 aug, there is now a later one), it is also already gone in the one earlier that day.
 
Last edited:
Of course they don't know what was discussed. McHrozni has been caught blatantly lying again and again in this thread, just like now where he says the line was in those versions even though anyone can simply check for themselves that it isn't. They live in some sort of fantasy world, it's mostly just pathetic.

Please, don't ever change. You're the highly amusing confirmation of the Poe's law.

The same goes for you, CE. :thumbsup:

McHrozni
 
truther, neonazi, usefull idiot, trying to be the cool contrarian anti-imperialist, st. petersburg troll.

Your insults surely hit close to my heart!
If the shoe fits, make sure to polish it so that it looks nice.
How about putin forcing ukraine to declare gerard depardieu an enemy of the state?
That's so funny someone ought to make a movie out of it.
 
And the banning continues.
This time western media from the BBC and die Zeit.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/16/ukraine-president-bans-journalists-from-country

I predict that any comment about this will be along the lines of "What about media in russia"
This will of course be "whataboutism", an old imperialist propaganda trick, developed during the cold war, where every mention of problems in the west is deflected by countering with problems in the east.
Of course accusing whataboutism is in itself whataboutism. That's part of the beauty.
 
And the banning continues.
This time western media from the BBC and die Zeit.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/16/ukraine-president-bans-journalists-from-country


Indeed only the latest move of what might be the most laughable criminal regime in history. From a read-worthy three part article series published in late August by Inna Rogatchi in Arutz Sheva (Israel National News):

Inna Rogatchi said:
[...] With unprecedented zealotry in implementation of what they believe is their new cultural and ideological identity, Ukrainian authorities did not find a better solution than ‘black lists’. They are enthusiastically blacklisting everything and everyone now – people, books, films. Those lists are telling, too.

The new Ukrainian authorities have 554 people on their black list of cultural personalities, mostly Russians, but also Steven Segal and Gerard Depardieu, and even the American boxer Roy Joyce Jr. who opted to move to Russia. Blacklisted writers, artists, actors and singers are officially declared by new Ukraine as ‘imposing a threat to its national security’. The Ukrainian authorities do know how to amuse effortlessly, it seems. Many of those very dangerous people are in their 60s, 70s and 80s; they had been the most prolific culture figures for millions of viewers and listeners for decades.

The films with all those enemies of Ukraine, including Segal and Depardieu, are banned too, of course. The French star laughed at the ban and thanked the Ukrainian authorities for what in his view is an honour.

In comparison, the white list of those whom they listed as their friends contains 34 names. Some of them, like the famous Russian actor and poet of Jewish origin Valentin Gaft, has declared that he had been white listed without his knowledge and is officially asking the Ukrainian authorities to black-list him, please. Another, the cult Soviet and Russian satirist writer Mikhail Zhvanezki, also of Jewish origin, has stated that “he is stunned by the decision, and does not quite know how to treat it, to cry or to laugh.”

The new Ukrainian authorities’ attacks on literature and cinema are unprecedented for the beginning of the XXI century. In June 2015, the Ukrainian State Cinema committee proudly reported that “while they banned 161 films in previous months, by now the figure is 384”. The ban has been carried out following the special law passed by the Ukrainian parliament in February 2015, and followed by another special decree of the president in June 2015. The law has banned for good the films produced by Russia from 1991 onward and having anything to do with police, army, special forces, etc. , including practically all films on the Second World War, on the First World War, and many historical ones. The presidential decree has banned all Russian film production from 2014 onward, including cartoons.

They are banning books and banning writers en masse and they are banning the film versions of their own Gogol – who wrote in Russian and escaped from his place of birth first to St Petersburg and then to Italy, and their own Bulgakov for ‘unfavourable depiction’ of Ukrainians. [...]


And these are the more harmlessly amusing aspects of what she calls the neo-Nazification of Ukraine.
 
This will of course be "whataboutism", an old imperialist propaganda trick, developed during the cold war

I'm always amused when commie sympathizers call the west "imperialist". It's particularly amusing in the current circumstances, given that it's Russia that's carving out territory from another country with military force.
 
I'm always amused when commie sympathizers call the west "imperialist". It's particularly amusing in the current circumstances, given that it's Russia that's carving out territory from another country with military force.

I'm always amused when nazi sympathizers put scare quotes around "Western imperialism." It's particularly amusing in the current circumstances, given that it's the US and EU that are grabbing resources from another people with military force.
 
I'm always amused when commie sympathizers call the west "imperialist". It's particularly amusing in the current circumstances, given that it's Russia that's carving out territory from another country with military force.

Indeed! Good question Zig. But what about russian imperialism? We must adress this first!

(Ziggurat is an advanced user of whataboutism. He knows that the other subject that is used to distract doesn't need to have anything to do with the subject adressed.)
 
Indeed! Good question Zig. But what about russian imperialism? We must adress this first!

(Ziggurat is an advanced user of whataboutism. He knows that the other subject that is used to distract doesn't need to have anything to do with the subject adressed.)

Given that this thread is about the situation in the Ukraine, Russia's imperialism is rather more on subject that the supposed western imperialism you refer to. So really, you're the one engaging in whataboutism, not me.
 
Of course I engage in whataboutism!
Pointing out someone elses whataboutism is in itself whataboutism.

Whataboutism is basically this formula:
"We should not discuss this subject because of bad thing x"
Whataboutism is a perfectly good value for "bad thing x"

In your case the value for subject was "Blacklists in Ukraine" and your "Bad thing x" was "Russians in the donbass"
 
I'm always amused when nazi sympathizers put scare quotes around "Western imperialism." It's particularly amusing in the current circumstances, given that it's the US and EU that are grabbing resources from another people with military force.

Is it alright to invade and annex a country if it has Nazis in it?
 
So whatabout freedom of the press in ukraine? Just can't have it when you are at war with the soviets?

Near as I can tell it was true for all countries that fought the Nazis. Soviets are just a different brand of the same ideology, even though the current Kremlin is making large strides towards uniting the two into a single brand.

McHrozni
 
This will of course be "whataboutism", an old imperialist propaganda trick, developed during the cold war, where every mention of problems in the west is deflected by countering with problems in the east.

You got sides of the world wrong, it's reversed from how you "think" it is.

McHrozni
 
Is it alright to invade and annex a country if it has Nazis in it?

Is it alright to use Nazis to suppress dissent in a foreign country in order to grab its resources? Good question.

Historically speaking Nazis are a prime choice for suppressing dissent when you need to do some economic looting of another country. However after the end of WW2 this was not done as openly anymore. The methods and lessons were still taught and implemented but the death squads and other such units didn't fly the Nazi symbols and flags anymore. The Ukrainian government is in this sense, as far as I know, the first since WW2 to include such units in its armed forces that openly identify with their Nazi counterparts. So is that alright? One thing is for sure, it's certainly taking this sort of **** up a notch or two over the "Latin American experience."
 
Last edited:
This will of course be "whataboutism", an old imperialist propaganda trick, developed during the cold war

True, sometimes even claimed to be a fallacy.

where every mention of problems in the west is deflected by countering with problems in the east.

That's not the problem with it though, it's used as a "counterargument" to the other way around.

Let's use an example. Country A has killed a million people and country B has killed a thousand.

A: "B has killed a thousand people."
B: "A has killed a million people."
A: "Whataboutism."

The first claim is then usually "B didn't refute A's statement". How this even needs saying is a mystery, as it's quite obvious that B didn't say "A has killed a million people therefor I didn't kill any." The claim is then extended to 1. "B should refute A's statement" or 2. "B's statement is irrelevant." Both of these are quite questionable.

1. Why should A be unimpeded to make statements yet B be restricted to statements that imply the negation of A's statements?

1a. A was the first to get an accusation in. Then it's quite simple, just keep up an ever-changing barrage of accusations against the other side. I think they call this "the media." The advantage here is also that you don't actually require any evidence, you merely need to claim that you have it.

1b. A is inherently entitled to restrict the possible set of statements to be made by the other side. This could be that "American exceptionalism" thing. It's not very convincing.

2. B's statement would be irrelevant to what exactly? Let's split up A's statement into two equivalent ones. "A thousand people got killed. B did it." B's statement would certainly be relevant to the former, but not to the latter.

In conclusion, the problem has nothing to do with people getting killed but with who's doing it. A way to look at it could be a mudslinging contest where A, by claiming "whataboutism" as some sort of magical phrase, is simply complaining about mud coming back his way because either "my mud got in first" or "my mud is better."
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom