Freedom’s Just Another Word For…….Breadlines…………..and nothing left to lose, of course. That famous Janis Joplin song behind the link is about, amongst other things, regret when she says “I’d trade all of my tomorrows for one single yesterday.” Powerful. Truth. Just ask the Crimeans…I bet many are feeling the same way increasingly every day since their fast-tracked Russian annexation. The NYT wrote about it here the other day. Read the comments at the link. Notice the Russian propagandists hard at work with their obvious and feckless defense. But there are not a few in the West, including America, who are drawn to and placated by this Russian strategy to infiltrate and invade Western media spaces with anti-American pro-Russian propaganda. Those who have embraced this ruse are duly noted for their lack of vigilance in providing support and comfort to meddlesome provocateurs. They now lack any credibility at all, if they ever possessed any before. Let’s break this article down a bit, shall we?

Under Russia, Life in Crimea Grows Chaotic

After Russia annexed Crimea practically overnight, the Russian bureaucrats handling passports and residence permits inhabited the building of their Ukrainian predecessors, where Roman Nikolayev now waits daily with a seemingly mundane question.

His daughter and granddaughter were newly arrived from Ukraine when they suddenly found themselves in a different country, so he wonders if they can become legal residents. But he cannot get inside to ask because he is No. 4,475 on the waiting list for passports. At most, 200 people are admitted each day from the crowd churning around the tall, rusty iron gate.

“They set up hotlines, but nobody ever answers,” said Mr. Nikolayev, 54, a trim, retired transportation manager with a short salt-and-pepper beard.

“Before we had a pretty well-organized country — life was smooth,” he said, sighing. “Then, within the space of two weeks, one country became another.” He added, “Eto bardak,” using the Russian for bordello and meaning, “This is a mess.”

Well, Mr. Nikolayev, freedom’s messy and as was mentioned above it’s breadlines and “just another word for nothing left to lose.” Obviously, you haven’t lost everything yet, so you’re not entirely free…but rest assured Putin’s Russia is working hard to get you there as quickly as possible. You’ll be free in no time, and when that time arrives, shortly, you’ll know The Saker’s right when he says “Russia Stands For Freedom.” Try disagreeing, Mr. Nikolaya. See what happens. We don’t have to see. We already know what happens. Per the article:

Crimeans are occasionally alarmed by armed men in uniforms without insignia who materialize at places like Simferopol’s train station, inspecting luggage and occasionally arresting passengers. Various people detained in protests against the referendum a month ago have not resurfaced.

When confronted, the uniformed men tell Crimeans that they are “activists from the people” who are “preserving order.”

Archbishop Kliment of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, vilified by its Russian counterpart, said Russian priests with armed supporters had threatened to confiscate churches in at least two villages. His 16 priests sent their families and their most valuable icons to the Ukrainian mainland for protection, he said.

Natalia Rudenko, the founding principal of the capital’s one Ukrainian school, said city officials fired her shortly after a member of the self-defense forces visited, demanding to know why the school was still teaching Ukrainian and not flying the Russian flag. Ms. Yurchenko, the tourism minister, said the school could continue to teach Ukrainian, since the new Constitution protected the language, but it would need to add Russian classes.

The quote above is an article within an article and actually deserves to be a separate story. The NYT has conflated two mutually exclusive issues here. One has to do with political and cultural persecution and the other has to do with transitioning between two entirely different and unique administrative systems. The latter can be excused as transition pains and hiccups, but the former cannot, and yet by positioning the former deep in the body of the latter in this article, the NYT allows the former to be waved away as a messy transition that takes time. That’s an injustice to those who are being persecuted who have no one to speak on their behalf. The NYT should be ashamed. But then again, what do you expect from a publication that takes blood money from the likes of Carlos Slim ? From the link:

Carlos Slim Still Reaping Big Rewards From NY Times Loan

If the billionaire chooses to exercise his warrants and keep the shares, he would own almost a fifth of Times Co. Slim’s loan in 2009 raised concerns that one of the most venerated U.S. newspapers would be beholden to the Mexican billionaire, who battles accusations of being a telecommunications monopolist in his home country. “Who is Carlos Slim, and does he want the paper of record?” read a headline in the New Yorker. “Let’s keep an eye on Senor Slim,” media columnist Jack Shafer wrote in Slate.

A takeover, however, is unlikely given the publisher’s dual-class share structure, which gives the Ochs-Sulzberger family a firm grip over the company’s board.

Slim is already the publisher’s second-largest shareholder with about 8 percent. His stake only allows him to vote for Class A directors, a group that represents no more than a third of the company’s board seats. The Ochs-Sulzberger family’s Class B shares let it elect the remaining two-thirds of the board, giving it effective and lasting control. Class B shares aren’t publicly traded.

Slim has consistently said he believed the publisher would overcome its struggles because its reputation and name recognition would help it survive the difficult transition from print to the Internet.

As he put it in a 2009 interview: “That is one of the best newspapers and brands in the world.”

I deposited the NYT article linked to above, about Crimea after annexation, at The Saker of the Vineyard blog and received this expected response:

Anonymous said…

Mr. Holefield,
Please don’t refer to the NY Times for any information about these affairs; that is like referring to Pravda in the old USSR days. Here in New York, we refer to it as the Pravda on the Hudson! They are the mouthpiece of the rulers here in the US.

22 April, 2014 17:50

I replied to it but The Saker finally banned me and didn’t allow my post out of moderation which is ironic since it was rather benign and agreeable compared to every post I made to that blog theretofore. I’m glad he did (banned me). I know, I lied. Reality’s a lie though, remember? I did lie well though, and for all the right reasons. I said the other day I wouldn’t post to that blog any longer, but I did. I couldn’t help myself. I’m glad I did and I’m glad I lied to you about it. You should be glad too. It’s provided such great fodder for future posts. I’ve essentially reconstructed my reply, to the best of my knowledge since I didn’t keep a copy, as follows:

I agree the NYT is propaganda and disinformation as is most every news and commentary source these days, The Saker of the Vineyard included. But that doesn’t mean these sources are entirely false, it just means you must be more adept at separating the wheat from the chaff. You cannot claim your sources aren’t as shitty and somehow purvey the truth in a sea of lies. Do the hard work of discernment and quit countering one shitty source with another shitty source like it’s some football match. That’s regressive and repressive.

Also, for your information, very few of my comments to NYT articles make it out of moderation, so, like The Saker, the NYT censors any and all messages that don’t adhere to the propagandistic script. To call the NYT out as propaganda at a honey trap hang like The Saker of the Vineyard is yet another instance of the pot calling the kettle black. In otherwords, your hypocrisy is showing, but of course you know that, I’m sure.

Alright, I didn’t say it quite like that. The orginal version was much more benign and I didn’t know The Saker had banned me yet, but it’s what I would have said knowing what I know now. I was hit with another case of l’esprit de l’escalier. Timing, like location, is everything.

I know, you’re wondering why I mentioned Carlos Slim and his ownership stake in the NYT. Well, per the very astute and clever anonymous poster at The Saker of the Vineyard who felt compelled to school me about the NYT being propaganda, it’s important to understand exactly what this propaganda is and who or what exactly is behind it. The Saker’s anonymous claims it’s the U.S. government. I beg to differ. I think it’s a mouthpiece for the WWON (World Wide Oligarch Network), and of course, Slim is a heralded and outspoken member. For example, per his Facebook page he didn’t see a problem with Putin seizing indefinite power in a sham election. In fact, he not only didn’t see a problem with it, he congratulated Putin for his naked power grab and called Putin his good friend. That’s the outspokenness I was talking about. Some things are better left unsaid, Carlos, although I highly doubt Slim gives a hoot what Small People think about his cozying up to dictators and his support of tyranny. Here’s the Facebook page I’m referring to, not that any of you will review it. Very few reading this blog actually click on the links. Proof, if you ask me, that the readers are ideologues who already know everything there ever is to know so if it doesn’t validate their obvious prejudice, they’re not interested in anything disconfirming to their stalwart paradigm. Understood, but I’m providing the link for the very few who like to challenge themselves rather than sit in an echo chamber all day long and shout “Amen” to the repetitive and boring incantations of provocateurs and propagandists. Per the link:

March 4, 2012 ·
Congratulations to my friend Vladimir Putin for the victory’
Like · Comment

So, we have Slim who’s best friends with the oligarch dictator Putin and his oligarch friends, and we have Slim owning a significant stake in the propaganda publication known as the NYT. Gee, what does that spell? Correct, it spells Russian propaganda, or at least some access for Russian propaganda. It certainly would explain the preponderance of Russian propaganda commentary to any article the NYT circulates about Russia, Eastern Europe or foreign policy and events in general. And no, it’s not the NYT being fair and giving equal playing time to all interested in being involved the discussion. As I’ve mentioned, they don’t let the majority of my comments out of moderation yet they allow flagrant Russian propaganda through. Their comments are highly monitored and guided to make sure they abide by the script, and that script is to create and enable tension between a false East/West conflict duality. Consequently, we get comments like the following per the article I posted from the NYT earlier in this post:

rice pritchard nashville, tennessee 19 hours ago
This is more anti Russian propaganda that the Western media is constantly trying to convince everyone how terrible life is under Russian rule. The point is an overwhelmingly majority of Crimean residents freely voted to join Russia. Yes there will be disruptions. However if things settle down on the broader Ukraine question Crimea should become a vacation/tourist “hotspot” for not just Russians but people from all over Europe within a few years. There will be plenty of jobs, peace and prosperity along with cheap gasoline and natural gas for the locals. They will be singing Putin’s praises within a short time if things go as planned and the West does not derail Russia’s plans to rebuild and reconstruct Crimea as a sort of Black Sea Costa del Sol. The annexation of Crimea is a done deal and all the crying and hand wringing in the world are not going to change that. Crimeans and Russians are virtually the same people in language, culture, religion, etc. When the new bridge is completed it will work wonders for the local economy. It is just a shame that the Western media is controlled by big banks and big business and refuse to show the truth and anything positive about Russia, her people, and her government. Russia is a great nation and someday when her freedom and independence and security are respected by foreign nations she will prove to be a staunch ally and good friend in the ongoing struggle to preserve, protect, and perpetuate Western, European, Christian civilization.

That one actually got 2 recommends. Don’t you just love the recommends? Of course, the NYT also has what’s called a “NYT Pick” for its comments. They pick or choose a handful of comments to any article and slap this badge of honor on them according to some crterion or criteria only they know, but you conclude it has to do with the comments’ adherence to their social engineering script. The NYT commenting system is extremely hierarchical and that’s for a reason. They are maintaining the message under the guise of freedom of expression. You’re not free to express if you’re being implicitly instructed that any comment that strays from the script will either not be posted or will be kicked to the bottom of the hierarchy where it will be ignored by the brainwashed dolts who seek social acceptance and acknowledgment over diligent, objective and unique investigation, inquiry and expression. I could easily write comments to the NYT that would not only make it through moderation but garner the “NYT Pick” designation as well, but I would be lying, and you know how I feel and what I think about lying. Hence, this blog. Here’s another juicy one from a boiler room in Moscow:

SovietBear Argentina Yesterday
The article is very nitpicking. It looks like that NY just looked for the most disgruntled individuals and then generalized that sample for the entire population of Crimea. Pretty lousy way to conduct a survey and investigation, that would tell you any unbiased statistician. It remembers me the article about Sochi Olympics that, if we believed to the Western media, were a true hell on earth, when in reality they were one of the most successful one in the Olympics’ history.

2M people live in Crimea. How many of that population are lawyers, traffic officers and Ukrainian food importers ? Just a few hundreds. They don’t even represent 1% of the total population. The annexation will not be rolled back just because a few lawyers refuse to study Russian laws and a McDonalds closed.

This article is written as a reaction to the hurt American rather a true concern for the well-being of the people of Crimea.

What Crimean people is experimenting is a just a few inconveniences compared to what Ukrainians will suffer when their economy will collapse completely. Shall I remember that Ukraine literally got zero money so far from its ”Western allies”. The USA is more busy fighting Russia than bailing out Ukrainian economy, and no European power runs to their help with an open wallet. And you know why ? Despite the unconditional moral support, the USA and Europe don’t trust enough the new Ukrainian government to give them money. Oh the irony.

That one didn’t even try to hide its identity with the name SovietBear, or maybe it was a joke. Either way, it made it through. Imagine that. Both examples I provided underscore what I mentioned previously about overlooking the political and cultural persecution camouflaged deep within the body of the article. It’s easily waved away as transition pains. Nice job NYT. You and Slim are class acts all the way. There was one comment from that article I wanted to highlight that wasn’t Russian propaganda and somehow slipped thought the tight filter. Here it is:

Kalidan NY Yesterday
If the Russian ethnic groups in Ukraine and Crimea did not know about the chaos likely to ensue, I must’ve overestimated their collective intelligence. Did they forget the period of 1991 – 1996? I understand they were choosing between two horrible options. A Ukrainian government that would steal and pillage everything in sight until the political, economic, and socio-cultural landscape became post apocalyptic, or the cold embrace of Russia – which promised pretty much the same thing but with likely some privileges for those with Russian ethnicity (or so they imagined).

It is very ironic. When I spoke to Russians at the end of summer 1991, they were terribly concerned about the post Gorbachev chaos, and seemed to prefer totalitarianism over disequilibrium. They got both. So will Ukraine.

The clearest lesson for the disperse former Soviet republics – all of whom are a rainbow of basket cases – ought to be clear. If they are not constantly (and painfully) working toward pluralism, democracy, and more so, transparency and rule of law, they will be Ukarainized and Chechnized by the big bear. EU will not come to your rescue, and the world will not even notice. There is little sympathy the world has to spare for people who want it all and make sure no one else gets anything. Time for some self-reflection fellow earthlings.


Kalidan is on the trail. That comment, believe it or not, did receive the “NYT Pick” badge of honor. I suspect if Kalidan continued to post and started to expand upon his/her increasingly enlightened investigation to include providing a link to his/her own blog for further in depth elaboration and clarification, his/her’s comments would not only be denied the “NYT Pick” award, they wouldn’t make it out of moderation.

Nonetheless, I like the term Ukrainized. That’s exactly what we’re seeing play out, and I believe it’s been the plan all along. It’s Ukrainization in process and so long as these former Soviet satellite states rely on corrupt strong men to run their government, this will be their fate. A people who are truly self-determined must govern themselves. If they leave it entirely to the auspices of sociopaths and psychopaths with no rule of law or any shred of checks and balances in word or deed, then Ukrainization will be their destiny. The World Wide Oligarch Network (WWON) seeks to fragment and fracture your countries into fiefdom statelets easily bribed and controlled by the global extortion racket where the disparity between rich and poor will resemble that of pre-Castro Cuba and the attendant corruption and oppression much the same. The Small People will be even smaller. The Small People will return to their former status as slaves or serfs. And the rest of the developed world won’t even blink so blinded they are by trivial distractions such as House of Cards and Homeland or manufactured substantive distractions like Peak Oil, Climate Change and Collapse. This Kabuki Cold War distraction is for the edification of the intelligentsia, and my oh my, how they tear at the fabricated flesh of this faux East/West strategy of tension crisis like starving wolves.

I would like to return to this underlying theme of Freedom. As we learned earlier thanks to the beneficent vineyard saker, “Russia Stands For Freedom.” I keep quoting it because I can’t type it with a straight face and the quote marks are reflective of that state of mind and sentiment. The Crimean people with their recent annexation to Russia are getting their first tastes of True Freedom (Yoo Hoo, HBO, quit ignoring me…the pipeline’s full of True). In my previous post I introduced you to Monica Perez, the celebrity talk show fan of The Saker who posts at his blog, The Saker of the Vineyard. Before I take this further, and in light of what we’re discovering about life in Crimea after annexation and where things are headed for the Crimean people on their Yellow Brick Road to True Freedom, it must be emphasized that Monica fully understood and supported this unfolding tragedy. Here’s an article where she invites Putin to take Crimea and I would dare say, invites him to take any place he damn well pleases because he will rid those places of their infections just as he’s cured Russia of its infection. Here’s a little of what Monica has to say per that link:

A libertarian take on Crimea and self-determination

Frankly, if the Constitution and Bill of Rights could be restored, I would not argue with the premise that a modern state could in fact reflect the consent of the governed. As it is, however, the United States government is operating far outside any parameters of implicit consent given by the American people who recognize our founding documents as the law of the land.

Crimea, on the other hand, has garnered nearly unanimous consent for the government it has chosen. Two weeks ago, Crimea declared its independence from Ukraine. Yesterday, 82% of Crimea’s eligible voters voted 96% to join Russia, if Russia will so allow. This is the closest thing to the consent of every sovereign citizen in that territory that I can imagine actually happening. Even in my anarcho-capitalist society, there would be decisions of government* that would reflect compromise rather than unanimity–surely that would be the norm.

Further legitimizing the Crimean decision is what lies at its heart. After Crimea declared its independence last week, why would it vote to join a huge country with pervasive corruption, federal taxes and international conflicts? Why not remain independent and save the money and the compromise? The obvious reason is to achieve what is arguably the sole legitimate purpose of national government: territorial defense.

Think of it this way, if your state could secede from the Union and simply stop forcing its citizens to pay federal taxes or obey federal laws, wouldn’t you be tempted at this sad date to vote for that? Once you declared your independence, would you want to turn around and join RUSSIA??? Maybe if you thought the U.S. was in as bad a shape as Ukraine is and it was threatening to invade and force your state back into its fold. Perhaps you would then find the trade-off worth it. That is the choice facing Crimea. Crimeans have voted (almost unanimously!) to ask for the protection of a national government, Russia, and its military, against an anticipated aggressor, the New Coalition in Ukraine, and they are willing to accept the high cost of this arrangement. They have that right.

President Obama’s argument that Ukraine has a right to territorial integrity at the expense of Crimea’s sovereign citizens’ right to self-determination is a fallacy. All governmental rights derive from the sovereignty of the citizen, each of whom, in my opinion, has the right to self-determination. My extreme view that each individual should be able to opt out of the territorial monopoly we call the modern state is the foundation of my extreme libertarianism, but anyone who acknowledges the legitimacy of the American Revolution understands the right of a people to decide their government.

I’ve read this article several times now, and I’ll be damned if she’s not making a case for some American states to secede and petition Putin’s Russia for annexation. Perhaps that waanarcho-capitalist-workersn’t her intention, but it is an overt implication of her reasoning. How can this not be considered treasonous and traitorous if this farcical Ukrainian crisis truly is a Cold War redux? And remember, this woman claims she is a defender of personal liberty. She claims that, more than anything else, is what defines her and she embraces Putin’s Russia as the antibiotic that will cure our infection in the West and help us attain that personal liberty.

If you’re wondering why I used the words infection and antibiotic, well, it wasn’t me who first mentioned it–it was the liberty-loving Monica Perez who mentioned it in a comment to this thread at The Vineyard of the Saker (I now realize I’ve been typing The Saker of the Vineyard all this time–as if it matters or makes a difference) blog. Here’s what she said, specifically:

Monica Perez said…

I also had the thought that the Soviet Union was a foreign paradigm to the Russians. Have you ever seen the documentary evidence that agents of John D Rockefeller financed the Bolshevik revolution to prevent Czarist Russia from challenging Rockefeller’s worldwide hegemony over oil? (if that was his goal, it certainly worked)

You yourself inspired an additional proof of my idea that Soviet was foreign to Russia, and it’s this (please correct me if I’m wrong, it’s just a feeling I have)…

the Soviets banned the Russian Orthodox Church yet it remains a pillar of strength and the best representation of what it means to be really Russian, yet it was the very anti-thesis of Soviet by the Soviets’ own definition.

What do you think? Perhaps Russia merely freed itself from an infection.

22 APRIL, 2014 17:40

Sweet Mother of Monica’s Jesus (I’m assuming she’s still Roman Catholic since she makes a point in her bio of telling us how she was raised Roman Catholic)!! Before we get to what that infection might be, I felt obliged to respond to Monica. Here’s the post that was the straw that broke the camel’s back in getting me banned, thankfully:

Cold N. Holefield said…

What do you think? Perhaps Russia merely freed itself from an infection.

It’s a pretty weak nation and people who would murder and repress each other to such an extent at the behest of a few bankers. By virtue of what you believe, the Russian people are gullible and easily swindled and duped. So, we’re to believe things have suddenly changed and they’re not being duped again?

But let’s assume you’re correct, which you’re not of course, then tell us Monica, would you be open to Putin and Russia freeing you and yours from your infection? Wouldn’t it be great for packs of wild dogs to harass pedestrians in the urban centers of America like they do in Russia because no one can be bothered to engage in animal control? Wouldn’t it be great if all businesses in America had to pay not only federal, state and local taxes but also a tax to the mafia that’s protected by the state like in Russia? Wouldn’t it be great to murder and/or disappear anyone who disagreed with you like happens to journalists in Russia? And finally, wouldn’t it be great to outlaw homosexuality and beat up and murder gays until they lock themselves in the closet like they do in Russia? Freedom’s great in Russia, isn’t it? How long until Putin annexes America, Monica? Will you throw roses at the parade for him when he arrives after his victory?

22 APRIL, 2014 18:26

As you can imagine, my evocative, satirical rebuttal to Perez created quite a stir. A whiplash of comments from the anti-American, pro-Russian commentariat ensued. If you look at the “about” tab of this blog, a commentator by the name of Matthew took umbrage with my assertion about feral dogs in Russian urban spaces. I won’t repeat it here. You can look at his comment and my comment to him in that section of the blog if you’re interested. Another point they took exception with was my comment about gays and their treatment in Russia. They said I was brainwashed and imagining things; that gays are not persecuted and discriminated against in Russia. Perez’s comment about “infection” and Putin’s anti-gay rhetoric and legislation prompted a search, and lo and behold we have this. Of course, I know, it’s CBS so it’s a “mouthpiece of the American government” and therefore even though this is what Putin said and did, it’s negated because CBS can’t be trusted. Got it. Moving right along, here’s a “clean” and “refreshing” taste per the link:

Putin: Russia must “cleanse” itself of homosexuality

Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered new assurances to gay athletes and fans attending the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics next month. Yet he defends Russia’s anti-gay law by equating gays with pedophiles and says Russia needs to “cleanse” itself of homosexuality if it wants to increase its birth rate.

Putin’s comments in a TV interview broadcast Sunday still show the wide gulf between the perception of homosexuality in Russia versus the West. A Russian law passed last year banning “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations” among minors has caused an international outcry…..

“There is no ban on non-traditional forms of sexual interaction between people. We have a ban on propaganda of homosexuality,” Putin told a meeting with young volunteers preparing for the games. “We ban nothing, we aren’t going after anyone, we have no responsibility for such contacts.”

Putin said some U.S. states had laws envisaging criminal responsibility for gay sexual intercourse.

“We have no such thing, people can feel free and at ease but please leave the children in peace,” he said.

Putin did not elaborate. In a victory for gay rights activists, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003 invalidated any remaining anti-sodomy laws that prohibited sex between adults of the same gender.

The tone and sentiment of the leader of a country with so much concentrated power has significant influence on how people will react and behave. There is no doubt that if gays weren’t persecuted and discriminated against previously, they sure as hell will be now as this article from GQ reveals. A snippet from the link:

Inside the Iron Closet: What It’s Like to Be Gay in Putin’s Russia

One of the first men I met was Alex, a gay police officer who’d recently quit his job rather than enforce Russia’s new anti-gay law. He wasn’t always so principled: One of Alex’s early assignments on the force was snooping through a fellow officer’s computer for evidence of homosexuality. “I was just lucky it wasn’t my computer,” Alex said one night at a café on Arbat Street, Moscow’s main thoroughfare of consumer hipsterism.

His boyfriend wasn’t as glib: “It’s Germany in the ’30s,” he declared. “Hush, hush,” Alex said. “Not so loud.” It’s not Germany in the ’30s, he said; it’s Russia now. And that’s a subtler problem.

Yes, there are killings. In May, a 23-year-old man in Volgograd allegedly came out to a group of friends, who raped him with beer bottles and smashed his skull in with a stone; and in June a group of friends in Kamchatka kicked and stabbed to death a 39-year-old gay man, then burned the body. There’s a national network called Occupy Pedophilia, whose members torture gay men and post hugely popular videos of their “interrogations” online. There are countless smaller, bristling movements, with names presumptuous (God’s Will) or absurd (Homophobic Wolf). There are babushkas who throw stones, and priests who bless the stones, and police who arrest their victims.

But such people exist everywhere, said Alex. The difference in Russia now is who’s standing behind them.

The Russian closet has always been deep, but since last June, when the Duma began passing laws designed to shove Russia’s tiny out population back into it, the closet has been getting darker. The first law banned gay “propaganda,” but it was written so as to leave the definition vague. It’s a mechanism of thought control, its target not so much gays as anybody the state declares gay; a virtual resurrection of Article 70 from the old Soviet system, forbidding “anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda.” Then, as now, nobody knew exactly what “propaganda” was. The new law explicitly forbids any suggestion that queer love is equal to that of heterosexuals, but what constitutes such a suggestion? One man was charged for holding up a sign that said being gay is ok. Pride parades are out of the question, a pink triangle enough to get you arrested, if not beaten. A couple holding hands could be accused of propaganda if they do so where a minor might see them; the law, as framed, is all about protecting the children. Yelena Mizulina, chair of the Duma Committee on Family, Women, and Children’s Affairs and the author of the bill, says that it’s too late to save adult “homosexualists,” as they’re called, but Russia still has a chance to raise a pure generation.

In Russia, things are not falling apart, they’re coming together, isolated attacks developing into a pattern, the id of the street ever more in line with the Kremlin’s growing ego. My last day in Russia began with the news that Cossacks had vandalized two theaters in the night, neither of them gay but guilty of showing plays with homosexual characters. One got graffiti; the other got a bloody pig’s head at its door. Humor. Russia’s first queer film festival was to open that night—Gus Van Sant was coming to show Milk—but it was shut down by a bomb threat. In the afternoon, Artyukh just happened to be having a coffee at a café next to the theater. He got into an argument with a gay activist. Artyukh ripped out the man’s earring.

“Homosexualism is a war against Cossacks,” he tells us. So by rights homosexuals should be slaughtered. He recounts some of the ways Cossacks murder homosexuals. Historically speaking. “Of course, I cannot say this officially.” He cracks his first smile. “Cossacks,” he says, “are known for their humor.” For instance, gay men “like to put their cocks in the ass, so we put the shit on their cocks for them.” In fact, he says, sometimes they hold a man down and smear shit over his whole body. He chortles, waits for me to laugh. Do I not think this is funny?

There are three faces of homophobia in Russia: that of the state, that of the Orthodox Church, that of the fringe. And yet they’re one—a kind of Trinity. The state passes laws; the church blesses them; the fringe puts them into action. The state is the mind of hate, the church, now, its heart; the fringe is made up of its many hands. Some use the courts; some use fists. There are street fighters, and there are polished men and women who attend international conferences on “family values.”

Isn’t it great how Russia deals with its infections? No wonder Monica’s emphatically enamored and isn’t shy about asking Putin for some of that cleansing protection. That’s freedom Russian style. Personal Liberty never looked so satisfying. There’s nothing like having the state-ordained personal liberty to beat up, torture, maim and murder the infection of “homosexualists.” And remember, Monica’s a defender of personal freedom, so I suppose she condones this just as the Russian institutional trinity does. Nice. Sweet. It makes total and perfect sense. I’m seeing the light. Pass the antibac, please.

The NYT article about life in Crimea post Russian annexation made its rounds a source of folly, though. I say source of folly, because the blogs where I’ve seen it posted and discussed, it’s considered American government propaganda and therefore is a completely false account of Crimea as a fledgling Russian state. In fact, Margaret Steinfels posted it at Pat Lang’s blog, Sic Semper Tyrannis here to much derision and ridicule. The Colonel didn’t endorse it with words of his own like he does for other guest commentator posts at his blog signaling to his audience that it was fair game for impalement. And the agents did impale to their heart’s delight. Below are a few examples of the treatment the article received at Lang’s limited hang:

JohnH said…

Interesting contrast with Times reporting on Libya, where residents are reported “undaunted” amidst the chaos in the aftermath of regime change.

“Libyans complain that their leaders have squandered the revolution, engaging in power struggles and enriching themselves while doing little to improve the lives of citizens. Carjackings and kidnappings are so frequent that some people even lament the bygone security of Colonel Qaddafi’s dictatorship and call for a new strong hand to control the many militias and criminals at large.

Yet the enthusiasm for the revolution that rid the country of the ”tyrant,” as many refer to him, is still emphatic and widespread. The crowds in Tripoli, the capital, appeared undaunted even when a small car bomb exploded just yards from Martyrs’ Square. The front seats of the car were damaged, but no one was wounded.” (Carlota Gall, 2/18/2014)

Are Libyans really more upbeat than Crimeans, or is that just how the Times chooses to view it?

That’s a fair piont, John H and worthy of discussion if that’s the topic, but it isn’t the topic. The topic is the plight of the Crimeans pre and post Russian invasion and annexation. And yet John H waves it away and says “look over there and not over here.” Where is your criticism for Putin’s Russia, John H? No doubt you had plenty of criticism (and rightfully so, I will add) for the Obama administration and the “Jews who control him” during the whole Libyan massacre, but yet not a single negative word for Putin’s obvious expansionist aggression. Curious, that. Vladislav Surkov and the rest of the Kremlin leadership must be laughing their asses off and scratching their heads at Westerners like John H and a host of others, not only at Lang’s blog but many others as well, carrying water for them without so much as having to lift a solicitous finger. What a return on investment. Something for nothing…and their chicks for free.

Many at Lang’s blog are current or former military. Let me ask you, is this what you expect you’ll get when you hand over sixty percent of every federal income tax dollar you’ve been coerced to transfer to them via American tax law? These so-called warriors who, like my golden retriever, will not only let the home invaders in, they’ll hang a sign up out front that says “come on in, the family’s asleep, I’ll show you where the cookie jar is and bite the hand that’s fed me all these years and you don’t even have to pat me on the head” all the while wagging their traitorous tails whilst acting their part as the greeting party. Pathetic. A joke. Exactly. As I’ve said all along, none of this can be taken seriously when you pull back the transparently sheer curtain. But, what it should say to you is that your taxpayer dollars have been a huge waste to you all these years. The American military establishment obviously doesn’t have your best interests at heart. It’s in collusion with the so-called enemy, and if Russia’s not the enemy right now, and we know it’s not by virtue of what I’ve covered in this blog, then why the need for the bloated military budget other than to pay the salaries and pensions of those who not only would sell you and your loved ones down the river on your dime, but already have.

Here’s another one from a prolific, welcome and longtime commentator at Lang’s blog:

kao_hsien_chih said…

I think the NYT piecw is rather pathetic.

No one in Crimea, I think, had expectations that Russia is anything approaching even a booming economy. However, most of them, esp ethnic Russians, do have legitimate reason for fearing oppression from Kiev, which recent events seem to have very much validated. Doubtful too many of them would rather be back under Ukrainian administration now.

If NYT has to stoop to heroin addicts to find enough dirt on Russian Crimea, it smacks of much desperation.

You know what I think is pathetic since this interlocutor mentions pathetic? He/she/it is. I’ve followed this screen name’s postings at Lang’s blog for awhile now, and this entity does not sway. It has a definite purpose and that purpose is to criticize all things American 24/7 whilst sparing criticism for everything else in its wake. In otherwords, it’s disninformation and propaganda under the guise of analysis which is pretty much the purpose of Sic Semper Tyrannis in my opinion. The Putin-worshiping via lack of criticism is nauseating. For once in their long, illustrious and highly-decorated careers they’ve finally got a match in Putin, and what do they do? They switch uniforms and hand him the keys to the kingdom by virtue of their obsequious analytical opining. I want my money back, but unfortunately, there are no refunds in this game of winner take all.

Remember, in this thread to this blog I introduced you to an outed Strafor agent who is a seasoned commentator at Pat Lang’s blog. Wikileaks hacked Strafor’s servers and confiscated a slew of internal documentation to include email communications. In the linked thread, I posted Babak Makkinejad’s (the Strafor agent’s) email communication dated September 17, 2007. Here it is again because it’s pertinent:

From: Babak Makkinejad []
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 4:02 PM
Subject: Red October: Russia, Iran and Iraq

I think that Georgia and the Baltic States are not worth that much to
Russia. Ukraine is a divided country between anti-Russian Catholics in the West and the Eastern Orthodox Ukrainians & Russians in the East. It can be
easily destabilized and broken up into two pieces; a rump Ukraine and a
larger piece joining Russia. My point is that Russia can do all that without needing US permission. I think you have something with the ABM Treaty – 20 years ago that treaty was a major concern for USSR; it might still be so today.

In regards to Iran and Russia: there have been simulations of oil prices
under which an overproducing Saud Arabia bankrupted the Russian oil
producers. For the life of me, I cannot see Russians permitting Iran to
fall under the control of US. Then US will have political control over
the oil production of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. This
is a strategic threat to Russia as well as to India and China.

I agree with you that a short war between US and Iran is in the strategic
interests of Russia, China, and possibly India. Russians (and Chinese)
will then pickup Iran on the cheap since she has no place else to go. US,
Iran, and EU would be the great losers but for various reasons.

The US choices have always been predicated on the understanding that Iran
is not worth it (“it” being the price to be paid to other states). I do
not see that having changed. So I am led to conclude that US will turn
down Russia’s offer.

Quite prescient, wouldn’t you say? I wouldn’t. In fact, I’d say it’s not prescient at all. I’d say it’s been the plan so there’s really no inexplicable guess work or magic involved. It’s called Ukrainization. The fate of the Ukraine’s been decided well in advance and the Ukrainian people haven’t known it and will never have a say. Let’s fast forward seven years to present day and look at some of the latest “public” disinformation from this Strafor agent, Babak Makkinejad (you have to love this name…it’s almost as good as Barack Hussein Obama. They have a sense of humor, I’ll give them that–even if they don’t realize they do) deposited conveniently at Lang’s Sic Semper Tyrannis:

Babak Makkinejad said…

Where does Putin come from?


He loves his country – Russia – and will do all in his power to enhance her Power & Glory.

As any leader worth his salt would do anywhere else in the world.

That is a real gem. “Putin loves his country.” The “his” part is not trivial. It is “his” country afterall and he and his henchmen have made it to their liking…or are working overtime trying to make it to their liking, but some things die hard…like old Russian habits (damn vodka). Always beware of any leader who declares he/she “loves their country.” It means something quite different than what’s implied as history’s proven, but Babak presents it as a positive and noble attribute–something to be respected and revered and, of course, something sorely lacking in the West, and more importantly, in America. More pro-Russian propaganda meant to underscore this faux East-West strategy of tension divide and paint the current leadership of the West and America as feckless, corrupt and incompetent. So much so, we may need a coup to dethrone the Zionist Neocons who have taken over the U.S. government (following the illogic), or at least that appears to be the implicit, and in some cases explicit, message. The feelers are out there, strategically placed. One such feeler was placed at The Vineyard of the Saker recently. Here it is:

Anonymous Anonymous said…
Crazy Ivan says…

@ Afterthought 24 April, 2014 19:11

The Saker shared many times in recent days his view that the highest echelon of US military have more common sense than Western politicians, who de facto went amok.

We know as well, both military commands are in constant contact.

A few more such “world games” from the US side and the pressure for sort of coup d’etat in Washington DC will become unbearable.

If the Saker is right there’s a chance for us. If not? My imagination stopped here. 😦

24 April, 2014 19:28

As I’ve mentioned, The Saker may very well be with the intelligence services (high probability of it), Russian or American/Western, and there is no doubt spooks of all stripes are all over his blog…both observing it and contributing to it. In fact, it could be a spook who left that comment as a trial balloon. A coup d’état, imagine that? And of course, the military junta that seized power would be much more acquiescent and friendly with Heir Putin (at least moreso than Obama has been in rhetoric versus deed), no doubt. I’ve seen innuendo about this elsewhere…about a potential coup d’état–at Lang’s blog no less. I’m not going to hunt for it right now because it’s buried deep in the morass, but if you doubt me, just ask the NSA…they should know, and if they don’t, well, they’re not living up to their vaunted reputation, are they? The comment and/or comments I’m referring to over at Sic Semper Tyrannis belong to a a coddled commentator who goes by the name of Tyler. Tyler has intimated in the comments to which I refer that we need a coup d’état in America and Colonel Lang should lead the charge. If something like that hasn’t been noticed and flagged by the NSA for follow-up and investigation, then either all the stories about the ubiquity of the NSA’s all seeing eye are blustery nonsense, or this Tyler is making the comments at the behest of the NSA. I’ll leave it to you to decide which it is.

I know, I’m getting long-winded with this post but there’s so much material I don’t know where to cut it off. So, I’ll give you one more piece of information and call it quits until next post. I realize I’ve been picking on the traitorous and treasonous contradictions of the hard “Right” versus the hard “Left” in this contrived Ukraine crisis, but keep in mind I’ve mentioned Moon of Alabama blog many times now and it’s a hard “Left” blog by virtue of its author’s biography, although it attracts a sizable hard “Right” anti-Semitic audience and commentariat.

Pursuant to that, I’m providing another example from the hard “Left” in the spirit of balance and fairness. Here is a link to a diary post at a far “Left” blog called Booman Tribune authored by the diarist “Oui.” It’s quite clear by virtue of the comments this Booman Tribune diarist Oui supports, he/she/it is an anti-Semite which is interesting when you consider the content at that blog. Oui’s all over the internet though, not just Booman Tribune. For example, Oui likes to hang out at Moon of Alabama blog and ecstatically ejaculate to the rantings of lunatic anti-Semites too cowardly to say Jews versus the nouveau term for them, Zionists or Zionazis. Here’s what this Oui had to say at Booman Tribune per the link:

Today, moon of alabama is under even more severe attack than yesterday

(Niqnaq) – Since bernhard doesn’t seem to give a damn, or doesn’t read the long serious of comments warning that his blog has been under almost continuous DDoS attack for more than 24 hours, I suppose it doesn’t matter.

Someone you MoA readers may already be aware of, a certain “Cold N Holefield”, offers this overwrought analysis in Saker’s blog:

“Thank you for serving as a sponge for Western treasonous traitors. Your site is being offered as a link far and wide by all those, including many dissenters in the West, as proof of their hatred of all things “American.” We now know who they are, and when the time comes, hopefully their idol, Vladimir Damien Putin, will welcome them with open Gulags (versus arms). In that sense, you have provided an invaluable service. As for the meat of your content, pure ФСБ propaganda.
I’m prepared to call your bluff and Putin’s bluff, Saker. I’m ready to die. Are you and Putin? I don’t think so. You’re survivors, and survivors don’t commit suicide. You’re bluffing bullshitters, and if anyone in a position of a power had any balls, they’d have called you and Putin on your bullshit nuclear trump card already. You’ll never use it. Never. Want to bet?”

19 April, 2014 01:05

This impressively disturbed looney has a blog, even: Catcher In The Lie.
Far be it from me to suggest that he would be fun to tease.

Actually, that’s Oui quoting from another blog he/she/it frequents and patronizes. The name of the quoted blog is Niqnaq but I will not link to it. I’ve never visited it, but I can imagine the hateful, vitriolic filth to be found there. If that’s your thing, and apparently it’s Oui’s thing, then google search it and have a look see. Put your rubber suit on first though and make sure to check it for leaks before wading in.

Anyhow, Oui had this to say about the quote from the author of Niqnaq:

Indeed, Moon of Alabama was read across the globe and appreciated by many. One person who quoted the value of the blog MofA was investigative journalist of the Asia Times, Pepe Escobar. In my diary I listed an audio interview with him, the part below the fold.

I saw the troll “Cold N Holefield” come to the site and post two comments. He was quickly called out in the last few hours the site was LIVE. This was my comment about the troll:

In answer to post by: brian | Apr 19, 2014 10:40:07 AM | 211
Don’t feed the troll … Cold N. Holefield

@The Vineyard of the Saker

So I’m a Jewish troll and a federal agent who is part of a sting operation that attacked Moon of Alabama blog as part of a cyber warfare with Russia…at least that’s the implication of these two anti-Semitic nut jobs. Okay. If you say so. I guess I’ll be that now. And believe me, I’ve been so many things and been called so many things in my internet career, I don’t know who or what I am anymore or who or what I’m supposed to be. That’s one of the reasons I say there is no me.

Alright, you may be wondering who the author of the Niqnaq blog is. His screen name at Moon of Alabama blog where he’s been a frequent poster as of late is Rowan Berkeley of Berkeley Little Dogs (must click link…it’s too cute…unlike Rowan) fame. Okay, that last part’s not true, but the first part is. Here’s a taste of Rowan Berkeley at Moon of Alabama blog:

Yeah, well, fuck the USA, who cares whether they goddam talk or not. They are cruising for a nuking.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Apr 11, 2014 3:21:11 PM | 11

He sounds giddy with the prospect, doesn’t he? For good reason. That was just a warm-up…an appetizer for the main course of anti-American hate to come. Here’s a follow-up comment to this first one:

It occurs to me that probably NATO planners are probably assuming that even if they launched what I suppose they would call ‘preventive’) attacks (or ‘deterrent attacks’ or ‘projective self-defense’ or whatever) across the Ukrainian border into Russia, even then there would be some sort of schmaltzy Hollywood moment on the ‘Hot Line’ whereby Obama and Putin could agree each not to be the first to escalate to nukes. But if it was up to me, I would vigorously oppose any such agreement. It seems to me that eventually NATO would win, no matter how inferior they are as troops, planners or for that matter human beings. They simply have three times as many of everything, whatever its inferiority in terms of quality. They don’t care about that; they never have done. Being barbarians, they think solely in terms of quantity. They cannot even think seriously about quality without emotional distress caused by feelings of inferiority or more usually complete worthlessness. But anyway, if it was up to me, I would say: tell the barbarians: “We will nuke New York and Washington as soon as any deliberate attack is detected across the border.” And I would mean it too. Better to die on one’s feet than to live on one’s knees.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Apr 13, 2014 12:33:11 PM | 143

Wow! If Putin’s anything like this guy, which he’s not of course, we’re toast. I’m sure Putin and the Kremlin are considering Rowan’s advice and are chipping in for the latest and greatest in straight jacket technology (perhaps that’s what the internet really is?) to present to Rowan on his birthday, or sooner hopefully. But wait, there’s more. There’s always more, remember? This is the cherry on top of that already magnificent plan to blow up the world and be rid of the Jews once and for all, humanity be damned:

Maybe nuking NYC and WDC is a bit steep for a first effort. It might make more sense to give the yanks a long list of every facility they have in Europe and just say, we shall destroy all of them, with appropriately sized nuclear blasts. But I have a special refinement I would put in here, if US targets were still on that famous table where the masters of the world put their various more or less terrifying things. Someone would start waffling on about their ABMs, these famous PAC-3 Block 10 with added zest & flavor, and I would reply: Who said anything about missiles? Consider if you will the simple fact that about 150 million sealed 20-ton containers circulate within the USA annually. You could get through an awful lot of mobile x-ray machines, trying to inspect that lot. And fairly obviously that hasn’t happened, because of prohibitive cost and because as we have learned from the TSA’s revolting activities at airports, people do not much like being bombarded with x-rays from cheap, crappy machines used by untrained morons. So it would be wise, I would conclude, to assume that whatever nuclear devices we might have wished to place within your cities, are indeed there, perfectly capable of being detonated at the touch of a button.

Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Apr 13, 2014 1:35:22 PM | 146

And I’m the loony? Fine. If I’m loony and this nut’s not, then I’m proud to be a loony. Loony’s the new normal.

What’s most striking about what I’ve presented, as if that isn’t striking (nuclear?) enough, is that this Oui joker is a diarist at a Progressive blog with articles, and the attendant sentiment, like this one:

The Roots of Selective Admissions

It’s pretty interesting to read about the history of selective admissions at Ivy League schools. Having grown up in Princeton, I had many Jewish and half-Jewish friends, so I’d heard about the history of Anti-Semitism in admissions but didn’t know exactly how they’d implemented their screening process. And I especially didn’t realize that they began giving preference to geographical diversity as a way to avoid letting Jews test into too many open slots. It always seemed odd to me that I’d meet Princeton students from Oklahoma or Alaska who were smart but who wouldn’t have been in the top echelon of students at Princeton High School. They got in because of where they were from, whereas countless Princeton High students didn’t get in because of where they were from. If you were from Princeton, you needed to be one of the top five students or so to have any chance to get in, so most people with Ivy-level credentials looked to Harvard, Yale or Columbia, where they had a better shot. So, ironically, kids in my generation (at least) were losing out to kids from out west or down south because of a system put in place to prevent too many Jews from attending Columbia or Harvard.

Hey Booman, you’re not very selective in the admission standards for your blog, are you? One of your diarists is a rabid anti-Semite and you haven’t a clue. Not to worry. You’re not alone. Neither does the majority of humanity, educated and uneducated alike.

That’s all for now. I hope you’re enjoying your time here. And to think, it’s all free. No donations are solicited like they are at these other blogs, Lang’s included. What a Communist I am. But of course, as the saying goes, “nothing’s free in this world.”  So, maybe not free afterall.

I have a WWIII party to attend. It’s like a Hurricane party except there’s no one left to report that the party’s been swept out to sea because everyone’s been metaphorically swept out to sea. It promises to be great fun. See ya.