Slashdot Mirror


Kremlin Seeks to Control Online Media

reporter writes "According to a disturbing report just published by Bloomberg, 'As the Kremlin gears up for the election of Putin's successor next March, Soviet-style controls are being extended to online news after a presidential decree last month set up a new agency to supervise both mass media and the Web.' However, unless the Kremlin pursues Chinese-style/Turkish-style blocking of the Internet-Protocol addresses of web sites like 'The Economist', even the Kremlin cannot control the online media. If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States."

220 comments

  1. In Soviet Russia... by Patrick+Mannion · · Score: 1, Funny

    Oh never mind!

    --
    In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by TomHandy · · Score: 0, Redundant

      In Soviet Russia..... Errr, I got nothing too.

    2. Re:In Soviet Russia... by skoaldipper · · Score: 1

      From the bottom of a Yeltsin 80 proof bottle to a Putin iron fist - the evolution of a democracy in the absence of a firearm? In Soviet election, ballot box stuff you!

      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    3. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      In So Viet Russia, Ho Chi Mins You!

    4. Re:In Soviet Russia... by brusk · · Score: 4, Funny

      In post-Soviet Russia, new overlords welcome you!

      --
      .sig withheld by request
    5. Re:In Soviet Russia... by ZDRuX · · Score: 2, Funny

      In Soviet Russia.. site blocks YOU.

      --
      The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    6. Re:In Soviet Russia... by renegadesx · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia online media controls you!!! Oh... wait a minute :S

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
    7. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Pros_n_Cons · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the United States the media controls you.

      --

      -- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
    8. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think this is a piece of pseudo news
      someone just assumed they are doing it 'cause they're "evil"

    9. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Heembo · · Score: 1

      As soon as I saw Yeltsin dance on stage in front of the camera very drunk, I immediately though, "I LIKE THIS GUY, PASS THE VODKA!!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aA-lal2MUKw

      --
      Horns are really just a broken halo.
    10. Re:In Soviet Russia... by smartr · · Score: 1

      Kind of like killer games? The media loves Hillary. Hillary hates games. Hillary pushes media regulation. Conformity controls people.

    11. Re:In Soviet Russia... by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      I think the one that applies here (I've seen it on /. before) is...

      In Soviet Russia, Government Controls Industry!

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    12. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Telvin_3d · · Score: 1

      and in Soviet America, Industry Controls Government!

    13. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and in Soviet America, Industry Controls Government! I don't think that word means what you think it does.

    14. Re:In Soviet Russia... by KimmoV · · Score: 1

      in Soviet Russia, people would've been happy to receive spam...you should've seen the lines for just bread!

      --
      This text has been written completely with recycled bits and bytes.
    15. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      George Bush doesn't control online media because he doesn't know what is it

    16. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Telvin_3d · · Score: 1

      Of course the phrase is completely meaningless. It was a throw-away joke.

    17. Re:In Soviet Russia... by revengebomber · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, tired old slashdot memes don't post you.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    18. Re:In Soviet Russia... by skoaldipper · · Score: 1

      Oh man, I owe you one brother. I had a hearty belly laugh a good 30 seconds at least. That video is pure gold. Now I'm off to the ER to get my side stitched up. I'll send you the bill!

      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    19. Re:In Soviet Russia... by PPH · · Score: 1

      ...Putin makes a deal with Bush. The USA pulls all of the Russian political dissent sites down and Russia cracks down on phishing operations.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  2. Like always in Russia by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 1

    it takes a dictator to get anything done. Peter the Great, Stalin, and now Putin are part of a Russian tradition of autocracy.

    --
    Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    1. Re:Like always in Russia by Patrick+Mannion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well this is what happens when your President was once a KGB chief.

      --
      In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
    2. Re:Like always in Russia by happyemoticon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know, Bush Sr. used to be the head of the CIA.

    3. Re:Like always in Russia by some+damn+guy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He is not an autocrat. George Bush looked into his eyes and he saw it for himself, a method far more powerful and revealing than any mere logical argument.

      Plus if this were true, would we have spent six years pissing off the entire world chasing two-bit terrorists while the government of the nation with the worlds most dangerous nuclear arsenal consolidated power and grew ever more despotic, violent and belligerent?

      So do be silly, Russia is a de-mocracy now, that means the problem is solved, friend.

    4. Re:Like always in Russia by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      Since when is drawing parallels on slashdot offtopic? The article brings up the United States, which just nixed habeous corpus . . . also Soviet style.

    5. Re:Like always in Russia by imemyself · · Score: 1

      Good point. Honestly, though, I have a lot more respect for Bush Sr. than I do for Bush Jr. Maybe if Sr. had gotten two terms my opinion would be different, but Bush Sr. wasn't all that bad of a President, better IMO than his predecessor(Reagan) or successor (Clinton).

      --
      Every time you post an article on Slashdot, I kill a server. Think of the servers!
    6. Re:Like always in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you blame them? Yeltsin was democratic but the place went to hell. Putin may be an autocrat but the country is no longer falling apar.

    7. Re:Like always in Russia by Shihar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Soviet style" is when you round up a few million people without trial and make them slaves in work camps in some place very cold and do this such that the vast majority of them die before there 'term' (if they even got one) is up.

      Take a fucking breather people. There are a lot of things to bitch about when it comes to the US and its direction. That said, the extreme hyperbole where you compare the Soviet Union justice system to the US makes you sound like an idiot not worth listening to.

      I am not happy with the direction that the US is headed in many regards, but people need to screw their heads back on and get some perspective. The US is not Soviet Russia. Hell, it isn't even close to the Russian Federation or China. The US is still very much a liberal place to live, and in many regards far more liberal in some areas then Europe. The US has a long way to fall before it reaches the level of Russian Federation (much less the Soviet Union).

    8. Re:Like always in Russia by AaronLawrence · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Slaves in work camps? You're thinking of Stalin times, 1930's to 50's. After Stalin died things got a LOT better - there were no mass killings for one.
      I don't think the US realises how radically the USSR changed during the time it existed. It was messy and dangerous but somewhat functional under Lenin; brutal under Stalin; Kruschev denounced Stalin and changed direction radically; then it gradually relaxed until there was not the heart to continue forcing it to exist.
      Discussing the Soviet Union as if it has always been that same entity from WW2 is pointless.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    9. Re:Like always in Russia by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      So the Russians keep saying. "We need a strong leader". No, you need a MORAL leader first.
      Please Russians, stand up and vote this kind of stuff down, we don't want to see you fall back into another totalitarian disaster.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    10. Re:Like always in Russia by dryeo · · Score: 1

      This is what most people forget. Russia invented the secret police (long before the Soviet Union) and have a great tradition of doing this sort of stuff.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    11. Re:Like always in Russia by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Plus if this were true, would we have spent six years pissing off the entire world chasing two-bit terrorists while the government of the nation with the worlds most dangerous nuclear arsenal consolidated power and grew ever more despotic, violent and belligerent?
      I thought the USA had "the worlds most dangerous nuclear arsenal".
      Or did I not get the memo?
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    12. Re:Like always in Russia by plover · · Score: 1

      I thought the USA had "the worlds most dangerous nuclear arsenal". Or did I not get the memo?

      I think you quoted, but did not get, the point.

      --
      John
    13. Re:Like always in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 'ole "you have no right to complain because you don't have it as bad as..." argument is a surefire way to ensure that a situation will never get better, and will likely worsen.

    14. Re:Like always in Russia by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul.
      This guy looked Vladimir Polonium right in the eye and got a sense of his soul. That takes balls.

      Vladimir must have liked what he was seeing too or else Bush might have gotten an eyeful of dioxin.
    15. Re:Like always in Russia by LandruBek · · Score: 1

      "Soviet style" is ...

      Well, yours is not the only interpretation of what "Soviet style" is. And if you can't see the comparison between Soviet practices and recent events like the REALID act, the USAPATRIOT act, and warrantless wiretapping, then I think you need to learn more about the Soyuz.

      Soviet oppression: so much more than just gulag!
      --
      $META_SIG_JOKE
    16. Re:Like always in Russia by Der+Reiseweltmeister · · Score: 1

      It cracks me up how sometimes irony will get you +5 Funny, and other times its +5 Insightful. If that's not ironic...

    17. Re:Like always in Russia by vandan · · Score: 1

      My GOD! Someone who actually has a clue for once. You won't last long around here ...

    18. Re:Like always in Russia by bytesex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called 'proportional judgement' and it's applied all the time: in Saudi you're not allowed to bring in a bible - should 'christian countries' disallow a quran ? Of course not. 'We' are expected to be 'better' than that. Palestinians kill people and Israelis kill people, yet we judge Israelis more harshly for it. We expect them to 'better', 'apply higher standards', 'be more careful'. The Russians implement laws that limit freedom and so does the US - not in the same way, and yet they're being compared. Why is that ? Because we expect the US to be 'better', 'more protected', 'less easily brought astray'. Anyone who has ever been in a debate must have encountered proportional judgement at some point. Haven't you ?

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    19. Re:Like always in Russia by bendodge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In fact, Kruschev changed directions so radically that he built the Berlin Wall and had would-be crossers shot!

      --
      The government can't save you.
    20. Re:Like always in Russia by happyemoticon · · Score: 1

      I agree. Bush Sr. was probably the least interventionist president we've had in twenty years, and when he did, he did it mostly right (except for violating Islamic holy sites). Clinton engaged in a lot of reckless and ultimately pointless bombing of sovereign states. Ronald Reagan... well, don't get me started with that guy.

      While I think I was feeling anti-George*Bush* when I posted that, I deliberately kept it to just observation. Hell, maybe if the current Bush had served as head of the CIA, he (and the weasels who control him) wouldn't have destroyed everything the Republicans have been building since the 1980's and turned world opinion rabidly against the United States.

    21. Re:Like always in Russia by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Well...

      Frankly that makes a welcome change from having a notebook with 30+ thousand names of public officials, scientists, writers, etc and notes against their names in which order they should be killed. In the rare cases when Hrushev wanted someone shot that person was shot on the spot and it was not meticulously planned for years in advance. The way Beria was removed is a good example.

      That makes another welcome change from taking the passports of all rural population and effectively making them again a property assigned to the land like they were before the abolition of slavery during the land reform of 1860-1861. One of the first things Hrushev did during the warming was to give the villagers back their passports and allow them to travel again.

      That makes another welcome change compared to banning genetics as antisoviet and making practicing scientific breeding techniques a gulag offence. Not entirely surprising from a person with half-baked religious education for that matter. While Hrushev had his favourites as far as research was concerned, the difference between them was usually just financing, not a walk to the wall at 5 am.

      That makes another welcome change compared to planning 3rd world war and actively preparing for it. While Hrushev banged on the table in the UN with his shoe, he also finally put in place the red phone and the other measures which ensured that we now exist. If he and Beria did not kill Stalin we would have been all dead by now many times. If he did not sit down and negotiate we would have been dead at the logical conclusion of the Cuban missile crisis.

      And so on.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    22. Re:Like always in Russia by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      There were mass killings under (and directly ordered by) Lenin - ever heard of Red Terror, and in particular, the practice of mass-hostage taking of people from "hostile classes" (e.g. university students & professors)? The beginnings of Gulag also saw the day in Lenin's time. It was not dismantled immediately after Stalin's death either - the conditions slowly grew better, but it was only in 1960 when the camps were officially shut down. Not before an alternative was brought forth to deal with political dissent, of course...

    23. Re:Like always in Russia by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      The Gulag de facto existed from Tzarist times. Try reading Dostoyevsky.

      The Soviet regime was brutal by Western standards, but by Russian standards, it was business as usual. Let's not forget Nicolas II's regime gunned down a group of unarmed protestors.

    24. Re:Like always in Russia by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      Sure - I didn't say there were no killings under Lenin. I said AFTER Stalin. However things under Lenin were nowhere near as bad as they got under Stalin.

      Anyway, either way it's clear that the USSR changed radically over time, and the prevailing US view of this monolith Stalinist state from beginning to end is silly and dangerous. It's particularly unhelpful now when Russia is changing further, in new territory again.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    25. Re:Like always in Russia by LizardKing · · Score: 1

      Indeed there were mass killings under Lenin's rule, and he is on record as approving of them. Trotksy, still a poster boy for old school lefties because he fell out with Stalin, was the main implementor of Lenin's Red Terror. Also notable was Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the Cheka - a man so fixated with oppressing perceived enenmies of the revolution that he worked himself to death.

      You're also correct that the Gulags continued after the death of Stalin. Despite Khruschev's denunciation of Stalin's crimes, which as a leading figure in that era he himself was complicit in, the camps were not emptied. Yes, some political prisoners received amnesties but many more continued to rot in the labour camps.

      As for the grandparent claiming that things becames lot better after Khruschev, that's incorrect. The Brezhnev era saw a tightening of control, although it was thankfully nothing like the Stalin era.

    26. Re:Like always in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about as ironic as rain on your wedding day.

    27. Re:Like always in Russia by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Bush Sr. was probably the least interventionist president we've had in twenty years The laughable thing is that at the start of Bush Jr's presidency, there was a lot of talk about it being ultra-isolationalist. No, seriously...
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    28. Re:Like always in Russia by LizardKing · · Score: 1

      No one with any familiarity of Soviet history would claim that Khruschev was a monster on a par with Stalin, however he was not the great reformer that some people seem to think. Regular show trials and mass killings certainly ended with Stalin, but the criminal laws were not revised and remained open to abuse. Giving internal passports to people didn't make it easier to move around. The passport had to be carried - failure to do so resulted in immediate arrest - and simply by checking peoples papers their ability to travel could be controlled. As for genetics, Stalin was enthusiastic about the subject. He saw in it a "biological Marxism", a way of influencing the development of plants and animals through manipulation which mirrors the Marxist belief that environment shapes behaviour. Genuine work in the field of genetics was of course hampered by Stalins belief in the charlatan Lysenko. I haven't read enough to comment on the Cuban missile crisis, but I did get the impression that the US and USSR were at the very brink of nuclear war before the ships on their way to Cuba turned around. However, on the matter of "killing Stalin", there is still no conclusive evidence of foul play. The accounts of Stalin's final hours are contradictory, incomplete and likely to stay that way unless convincing new evidence appears.

    29. Re:Like always in Russia by init100 · · Score: 1

      The US is not Soviet Russia.

      Of course it isn't. This time, it's called Soviet America.

    30. Re:Like always in Russia by ImdatS · · Score: 1

      Funny how things happen. GWB looked into his eyes ... and Gerhard Schroeder, our (Germany) former Chancellor, was (and still is) convinced that Vladimir is a "... flawless democrat... " see http://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/putin_nid_4084 7.html (german) and http://politicsandpress.com/2007/vlad-the-great-st rides-west/ (english)

    31. Re:Like always in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dirty Russians commies license everything:
      http://www.lenta.ru/info/license.htm
      Russians are behind all the problems in the Middle East because they are a bunch of antisemitic latent nazis. When we will understand that they are enemies of the free world?

    32. Re:Like always in Russia by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If it wasn't for the fact that it's generally leftists and liberals - the promoters of equality - who express those sentiments, you'd almost come to the conclusion that they consider Blacks, Arabs, East Europeans etc to be somehow inferior. If not, what reason is there to accept and expect lower standards from them?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    33. Re:Like always in Russia by BillyGee · · Score: 1

      Well...

      Allow them to travel? To where? Who wanted to travel from one soviet community to another? They certainly weren't allowed to travel outside the Soviet Union.

      You also talk about the Krushchev warming...but what about the Brezhnev freezing right after? Many things, such as persecutions, whether political or otherwise, returned to how they were during Stalin.

      How about the invasion of Hungary by Krushchev, and the subsequent killings and deportations, was that another welcome change?

      How about the invasion of Czechoslovakia under Brezhnev, was that another welcome change?

      How about the continued attempt at genocide in the border republics, especially the Baltic states, by shipping in unskilled Russian workers, and giving them first access to food and shelter?

      You mention a welcome change being not planning for WW3...that's a little hard to comprehend, because it was Krushchev who almost caused not only WW3, but a nuclear war, with the Cuban missile crisis.

      I think it's a pretty safe bet you're a Russian, who is sad for the demise of the "great" Soviet Union, but please, don't spew your communist propaganda on Slashdot.

    34. Re:Like always in Russia by Shihar · · Score: 1

      OMFG, Google is trying to keep us from hearing about what THE MAN is doing? Quick, give me that link to that web site. In fact, while you are at it, lets quickly post about this crime in as many large news sites as possible.

      *cough*PR stunt*cough*

      Google doesn't give a shit. Google will index your nazi-prego-porn, anarchist revolution site, and your Google Sucks page. Far more likely is that they got delisted for good reasons, realize that this just scream conspiracy and publicity, and are dragging their heels on fixing whatever it is that has sent Google's crawler into a fit while they drum up as much publicity as they possible can by getting articles in Digg, Slashdot, and whatever high traffic sites they can find.

      Don't worry, it isn't an evil government conspiracy to eat your babies.

    35. Re:Like always in Russia by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The Gulag de facto existed from Tzarist times. Try reading Dostoyevsky.
      Of course I know about katorga, and, while harsh, it was nowhere close to what labour camps became under Stalin. Just compare the death rate figures.

      Let's not forget Nicolas II's regime gunned Let's not forget Nicolas II's regime gunned down a group of unarmed protestors.down a group of unarmed protestors.
      Yet again, it's all about proportions. Yes, there was political repression in the Russian Empire, with secret police, occasional torture, and other things this usually entails. Yet the scale of it was diminutive compared to the organized repression system put in place by the Bolsheviks once they were in power. Counting the dead alone, the difference is several orders of magnitude.
    36. Re:Like always in Russia by ElBeano · · Score: 1

      I didn't read the post you are responding to as communist propaganda. Neither did I see it as some kind of apologia for Krushchev. What I gathered was instead that Krushchev was "less evil" and that had Stalin been in place during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the east coast of the U.S. would look very different today (and I would in all likelihood not be posting). Neither did I read between the lines and manage to sense some nostalgia for the "great" Soviet Union. As to the evil we see in the world, is it really a great comfort to be "less evil"? To me it seems that it is just a way to make excuses and to rationalize behavior that results in oppression of the world's peoples.

    37. Re:Like always in Russia by bytesex · · Score: 1

      Not inferior, just at the moment incapable (without questioning the reasons why). The point is; you don't apply standards to them - I think Iraq showed that; you're just not in their shoes and 'nationbuilding' clearly doesn't work. But you're not willing to lower your own standards either. Take, for example, Saudi Arabia. They portray themselves as a 'Muslim country' - no bibles allowed. Do we reciprocate and say: 'no qurans allowed' ? No, we don't. It would fly in the face of freedom of religion. Besides, we don't portray ourselves as a 'christian nation'. It would fly in the face of everything we went through during the enlightenment. Do we call Saudi 'inferior' ? Can we, really ? Are they genetically different - incapable of eduction - too poor ? No. Two reasons: 1) They are incapable at the moment (cultural issues, mainly) and 2) Larger picture: perhaps Saudi isn't a 'country' as such. Perhaps they do not see themselves as representatives of a people the way the peoples of nations of the West do. Then what's the use in comparing ? You call it leftist. I call it realist - different place, different people, different mores. Oh, and just to make sure: when I say 'at the moment', I don't mean to imply that when the moment passes, things will progress and all will be 'better', no - 'at the moment' means just strictly that.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    38. Re:Like always in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What areas are the US more liberal than Europe?

      I am really wondering, no bitching intended.

    39. Re:Like always in Russia by andreyw · · Score: 1

      GDR != Soviet Union

    40. Re:Like always in Russia by init100 · · Score: 1

      You obviously missed the humor in my post. :)

    41. Re:Like always in Russia by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "Take a fucking breather people. There are a lot of things to bitch about when it comes to the US and its direction. That said, the extreme hyperbole where you compare the Soviet Union justice system to the US makes you sound like an idiot not worth listening to."

      What about all the illegal US wars? I mean its one thing to force people into labour camps, its another to attack any group of people that are not your own for wholesale plunder. No system on earth is immune from stealing and oppression, both capitalism and communism do the same thing: Capitalism by creating new sources of cheap labour and resouces via wars, communism via similar means.

      It's still fundamentally about resources.

      While the US might be a great place to live, its because the power base is not focusing all its efforts of greed and power against its own population, but external populations who the local US population do not really give a rats ass about. If stalin or anyone had turned outward (to war) instead of turning his ambitions inward you would see a very similar pattern to how the US has behaved and engaged in wars.

      No country is an angel, the US just masks and redirects its oppressive influences on others besides their home country.

    42. Re:Like always in Russia by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Many things, such as persecutions, whether political or otherwise, returned to how they were during Stalin. As a direct descendant of a person from the first page of Stalin's notebook (with a note against his name: "Not now, save for later") I can tell you - you do not have a clue. The Gerontocracy never got anywhere close. People were walking around, telling political jokes and living through it. If you told a political joke under Stalin your entire family was shot and sometimes your entire village ended up in Gulag for good measure.

      How about the invasion of Hungary by Krushchev, and the subsequent killings and deportations, was that another welcome change?. One country is a welcome change compared to half of Europe twice - once splitting it with Hitler, and once with Churchill and Rusvelt. You might as well ask the poles how did they like having Rokossovski performing "army cleaning" around after the war. Or the Bulgarians on the beauty of Belene under Valko Chervenkov, or the Romanians, or... As I said - you do not have the faintest clue.

      How about the continued attempt at genocide in the border republics. Genocide, what genocide? Now the 10 millions dead in Ukraine during the 30-es under Stalin that is genocide. The millions dead during the displacements of whole nations into Kazahstan and the deserts of outer mongolia - that is genocide. As far as "shipping unqualified russian workers" that is exactly the village to city migration which you claim to never existed. The revocation of passports by Stalin artificially arrested the move to the cities related to the late industrial stage which happened in the rest of the world between WW1 and WW2 (just look at a UK city built-out plan and you will notice the huge build during that period). When Hrushov gave the passports back the villagers rushed to the city everywhere as Russia was not an exemption to the overall world trend (from 40:60 city:village in the 1920-es to 60:40 in the 60-es). Pre-Hrushov post-war Moscow buildings have a tell-tale sign of this - an extra 1-2 floors built over all of them in a haste on the roof. And Hrushov added a nearly 10 miles wide ring of 5 story panel buildings on top of that (3+ millions of people). And as a matter of fact, Moscow and St Petersburg residents hate these "unqualified villagers" and their descendants as much as the baltic people hate the so called "russians". Which as a matter of fact are actually mostly Belorussian and Ukrainian anyway. I can understand the baltic people hating the invasion of hordes into their pretty cities. Well, I bet Camrbidge, UK cittizens hated it as well when it happened 30 years earlier. And they got on with it instead of calling it genocide. So did everybody else in Europe.

      Krushchev who almost caused not only WW3, but a nuclear . Minor difference, Hrushov did not actually schedule a date, prepare a full mobilisation plan and do the full planning for the war. Stalin did. If he was not eliminated the war would have started in around 6 months after his death. Hrushov actually listened to arguments that the war cannot be won and went back.

      I think it's a pretty safe bet you're a Russian,. As a matter of fact while I have russian ascendancy, I am not. Also as a matter of fact you have no clue what are you talking about. I suggest studying some modern European history first and doing some reading before spewing some xenophobic bullshit on Slashdot.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    43. Re:Like always in Russia by Burz · · Score: 1

      Israelis tend to kill many more Palestinians than vice-versa, and they use war machinery against civilian neighborhoods. Where is the sense of proportion there? And when was the last time any major news outlet took them to task for it by labeling the kind of murder they perpetrate with a judgmental term like "terrorism"?

      As for the US, it is constantly opening new military bases all over the planet and looking for new wars to start. The CIA is nearly full-time occupied with encouraging inter-ethnic hostility esp. in and around Russia and the Middle East (and are at it again within Iran at this moment) in order to bring about Balkanization (never mind that it encourages genocide). To the current US elites, countries like Franco's Spain and Saudi Arabia are the ideal foreign countries, esp. if they have plentiful resources: weak, fascist and compliant to the demands of US corporations.

      People outside the US will become more sensitive about Russia if/when it shows aggression and expansionism, but so far no one can come close to the American empire in those matters. The Russian people at least have news media that has some democratic accountability attached to it; the US gov't OTOH is controlled by corporate oligarchs including the media, and lately have had to stoop to sending their CEO types to Washington to run the rubber-stamping branch of American Capitalism.

      Why 'freedom-loving' American press is unconcerned with the spread of oligarch power in the US is not much of a mystery. Or why the same things they expect out of Russia are derided as "anarchy" within US borders; not hard to figure out. People who want an example of government and press as separated estates should look elsewhere, as the US corporate media is 'embedding' with its CEO-turned-leader errand boys in Washington.

    44. Re:Like always in Russia by Burz · · Score: 1

      "No country is an angel, the US just masks and redirects its oppressive influences on others besides their home country."

      Except for black, Hispanic and now Muslim people, with the first two groups bearing the brunt of the society (USA) that sends more people to jail and prison than any other. Building and running prisons has become very good business for corporations.

      The US is an international empire with a huge number of military bases all over the world, acting in the interests of corporate oligarchs. The authors of TFA are vested in the machinery of that empire and would not care to name the nature of the beast, much less actually examine it. Far easier (and more comfortable) to become hysterical over non-compliant oil producers (Iraq, then Russia and Iran) on the other side of the planet.

  3. almost as bad as... by User+956 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    You think that's bad, wait until the US gets full control over the DNS root.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:almost as bad as... by Shihar · · Score: 4, Funny

      You think that's bad, wait until the US gets full control over the DNS root.

      OMFG, that will be terrible! I bet the US will SHUT DOWN SLASHDOT. Now excuse me while I go look at prego-nazi-porn in one window while writing about how much of a TERRORIST GWB is.

      Yeah, I am sure the US getting the keys to DNS root will be a whole hell of a lot worse then the Russian Federation clamping on the last vestiges of free media in the Russian state. Everyone knows that the US eats more babies the North Korea, China, and Russia... COMBINED.

    2. Re:almost as bad as... by pacalis · · Score: 1
      google not indexing livelink.com, a new media service... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6a6_1176066336


      I submitted this disturbingly similar story today but it is still pending with the /. editors.

    3. Re:almost as bad as... by Paradigm_Complex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I concur that initially the US would (most likely) not do anything too terrible with the DNS root stuff. That would be, however, yet another step in the wrong direction; should it continue, honestly, what is keeping the US from lowering itself to North Korea? When the US (or any other) government has full control of communications, democracy can very easily be circumvented.

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
    4. Re:almost as bad as... by Shihar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When the US (or any other) government has full control of communications, democracy can very easily be circumvented.

      The government already has full control over communications, it just doesn't exercise that control. The US government could merrily call up all the telco's and tell them to install their censorship software or else US soldiers will burn their buildings to the ground and kill and rape the families of all the employees (they could also just threaten them with banking sanctions). Coercing telco's into doing it is trivial. The government has the power.

      The issue is the exercise of power. If the US government couldn't exercise the power no matter how badly they might want to. The courts merrily strike down anti-video game violence bills and would be even more emphatic in striking down censorship for political purposes. The 'government' is actually split into multiple branches, all of which love to grind against each other. The legislative and executive branches of government in particular are easily swept aside every 2 - 6 years.

      Finally, if by some insanity a president refused to follow court orders and passed legislation without a legislative branch, the military would start refusing orders (the military swears and oath to the constitution, NOT the president) he would be promptly dragged out of the Whitehouse kicking and screaming... most likely by his own secret service.

      There is a lot that keeps the US from being like North Korea. To is laughable to suggest other wise.

    5. Re:almost as bad as... by TehDuffman · · Score: 1

      Actually the armed forces do swear allegiance to the President. They also swear to the constitution. I don't know what would happen in a situation like that. The soldiers and Marines on the ground would probably refuse the order. Unless they were hippies or something, then i bet they would willingly take them out :).

      Marine Oath "I (state your name) do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

    6. Re:almost as bad as... by ImdatS · · Score: 1

      .. but never forget that the Constitution comes first! It's like the three Robotics Laws. The first part of the Oath overrules anything coming thereafter, i.e. if the President gives you an order which would seem like against the Constitution, you *have the right* to refuse such an order on the grounds that it's against US Constitution.

      Do not forget, though, that that might get you court-martialed...

    7. Re:almost as bad as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the people posting on slashdot are USians or from western Europe (which doesn't consist just of the UK). So please forgive us when we care more about when our own freedom is taken away than about the freedom of people in other countries.

    8. Re:almost as bad as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just having the right to defend the constitution instead of helping the president trampling on it obviously is not sufficient. It has to be a duty with punishment associated with neglecting the duty. Yet I have yet to hear of someone being executed for violating the constitution or allowing such a violation to occur.

    9. Re:almost as bad as... by TheZax · · Score: 1

      OMFG, that will be terrible! I bet the US will SHUT DOWN SLASHDOT. Now excuse me while I go look at prego-nazi-porn in one window while writing about how much of a TERRORIST GWB is.


      Frankly I am amazed at your comments above...I mean, where do you find this prego-nazi-porn ? No really, where do you find that?

      --

      JWall: GUI client for IPTables
    10. Re:almost as bad as... by Shihar · · Score: 1

      The armed forces swears to defend the constitution. It also swears to obey the orders according to the regulations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The duty to the defend the constitution is an absolute duty with no stipulations. The duty to obey a commanders order, with the president being the highest commander, is regulated and limited. The oath does not prevent disobey unlawful orders. The oath on the other hand does not give any wiggle room when it comes to defending the constitution. The constitution MUST be defended, but you can in some instances disobey an order without violating your oath.

    11. Re:almost as bad as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in soviet russia babies eat you!

  4. Finally..... by edwardpickman · · Score: 3, Funny

    the Russians are doing something Bush can get behind and support.

    1. Re:Finally..... by renegadesx · · Score: 0

      The war on terror, the war on Iraq and now...the war on Internet! Internet is a front for terrorism, didn't you get the memo?

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
    2. Re:Finally..... by Bemopolis · · Score: 1

      Well, Bush did claim to have seen into his soul and liked what he saw. It's our fault for taking his statement optimistically...

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
  5. Re:Sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah!!! We all know there are no anti-Bush sites on the internet, they have all been shut down!!

  6. Thats what happens when you let mafia run by unity100 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a country.

    sooner or later mobsters will show their true face and "weed out" competition.

    pity on any fools who think russia is a western, modern nation.

    1. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by Patrick+Mannion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More like when your president is a former head of KGB.

      --
      In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
    2. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course Russia is a modern Western nation, modeled directly upon the United Sta ... oh wait. I forgot. We're not so modern anymore.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      sooner or later mobsters will show their true face and "weed out" competition.

      Yeah! Took care of the Kennedys. After '68 they decided to play ball.

      --
      What?
    4. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by loftwyr · · Score: 1, Troll

      In capitalist America, media controls government!

    5. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by daigu · · Score: 1

      You mean western, modern nations are not run by the mafia? "The mafia is a kind of organized crime being active not only in several illegal fields, but also tending to exercise sovereignty functions - normally belonging to public authorities - over a specific territory..." Seems to me the key difference is whether the people running things are in public view or not - and even in western, modern nations the people running things are rarely those in public view.

    6. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by lilomar · · Score: 1, Troll

      It's not as funny when it's true.

      --
      The creator of this post (Jacob Smith) hereby releases it, and all of his other posts, into the public domain.
    7. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      The "mafia" is just the free market answer to national governments. Whether it's called "organized crime" or "public service" depends mostly on the number of customers paying for protection.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    8. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GHWB was a former head of the CIA... and I can't imagine that Junior is disobeying his father's bosses too much.

    9. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While that is true, the KGB have a worse reputation than the CIA.
      The KGB have a reputation for working with mobsters or hitmen. This is true for the CIA however its not on the same scale or even in the same ball park.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_ Agency
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB

    10. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by ringm000 · · Score: 1

      In capitalist America, the government IS the medium, and, as Marshall McLuhan said, the medium is the message.

    11. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by unity100 · · Score: 1

      was it too different when yeltsin was around ?

    12. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by Jerf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes. The carnage since the Bush Administration began murdering all of its loudest critics has simply devastated the academic and journalistic communities. Why, there's hardly anybody left alive at NPR, and Berkeley is a ghost town! And San Francisco might as well have been hit by a nuke for all the depopulation that has occurred.

      (Moral equivalence can be taken too far. Don't be so blinded by local demagogues that you allow them to mask true evil happening elsewhere. You end up making bad valuations.)

    13. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by rewinn · · Score: 1

      >More like when your president is a former head of KGB.

      Former? Hmmmm....

      Just because the secret police says it isn't around anymore, doesn't mean the secret police isn't around anymore. Although, in the case of Russia, it may have been privatized.

    14. Re:Thats what happens when you let mafia run by Burz · · Score: 1

      Most of the neocon's most dangerous critics and political adversaries were murdered in Iraq. US media even gloated for a while how Sunnis belonging to Saddam's party were being eliminated. The bulk of anti-journalist carnage over the past decade was committed by US forces and allies in the Middle East.

      OTOH, the last time internal power struggle became a real threat to the US mandarins, all the prominent liberal leaders incl. JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X were 'mysteriously' assassinated. It even happened to the Israelis in the 1990s.

      (Moral equivalence can be taken too far. Don't be so blinded by local demagogues that you allow them to mask true evil happening elsewhere. You end up making bad valuations.)

      I agree. Who could really compare what the US empire does in all of its military protectorates, occupied territories, and fascist banana republics around the globe, with a producer-nation like Russia?

  7. Russian internet brigades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe the Russian administration can't control the online media, but that sure doesn't stop them from trying.

    I suspect their government-sponsored trolls are also active on Wikipedia, where, besides pushing Russian propaganda, they try to suppress any mention of this phenomenon. Recently, an article on this subject (titled "Internet trolls squads") was voted into deletion, and now the resurrected article (titled "Internet brigades") has again been nominated for deletion by a number of persistent Russian editors.

    Read more about the phenomenon here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_brigades

    See the discussion on deleting that article here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_fo r_deletion/Internet_brigades_(2nd_nomination)

    1. Re:Russian internet brigades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oops, "Internet trolls squads" was a typo, it should read "Internet troll squads" (singular).

      I should add that both articles were well-referenced (especially the second, to bullet-proof it against criticism), but these editors find sources such as Reuters and the Washington Post unreliable (I guess it's too new of a phenomenon to expect books on the subject). These editors accuse the articles' authors of original research, conspiracy theories, creating hoaxes, and nationalism (a popular insult on Wikipedia).

    2. Re:Russian internet brigades by Original+Replica · · Score: 1

      So they are less elegant than our own Psyops. But I'm fairly sure every Government has a information control program of one sort or another.

      --
      We are all just people.
    3. Re:Russian internet brigades by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any entity composed of more than zero people has an information control program of one sort or another.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Russian internet brigades by nuzak · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Oh gosh, an asinine pure-POV soapboxing article was deleted from wikipedia, yes it must be a conspiracy. Oh wait, it's still there and someone dared suggest it be deleted. God damned russkies, can't trust 'em.

      I normally make it a point to not complain about the moderation system here, but who the fuck moderates this kookery up?

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    5. Re:Russian internet brigades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You say this but where are those kinds of sources for that entry and do they actually say what had been made from them? I think you are actually the writer of that article trolling for supporters because your position is exactly that which a troll always has. Nothing.

    6. Re:Russian internet brigades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Biophys on slashdot now?

    7. Re:Russian internet brigades by yoprst · · Score: 1

      Dunno about Wikipedia, but government-sponsored trolls are very active on Russian sites.

    8. Re:Russian internet brigades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely there is this danger. After all, I recall that Wikipedia's Occupation of Latvia article has also repeatedly & quite succesfully been attacked by some pro-Putin fanatics - perhaps they are current Persons on Duty :>

    9. Re:Russian internet brigades by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In facts articles from Reuter and Washington Post are linked to a tiny section about China, which was introduced to justify Russian sources leading to allegations and claims by Russian immigrants who were shown a dick by some trolls at forums and who called these common trolls - KGB employees. Considering that so many trolling and abusing and just dicking right here in Slashdot, using the same logic, I proclaim that KGB trolls are here and they crawl under your beds wanting your REEEEEEDDDDD BBLOOOOODDDDD!!!!

  8. It's Okay by Guuge · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Bush declared that Putin has a good soul, so there's obviously nothing to be worried about.

    1. Re:It's Okay by netscan · · Score: 1

      I think it's funny you were modded troll when 3 posts down the same mention of Bush's remark was modded +5 insightful

  9. It'd be eaiser by Patrick+Mannion · · Score: 1

    If Putin just put his black belt in judo to good use and kick the crap out of his opponents.

    --
    In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
    1. Re:It'd be eaiser by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Or, to paraphrase Lewis Black, "it'd be better if he just came to your house and pissed on your foot."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  10. Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul by straponego · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You can trust Putin, just as you trust his kindred spirit-- his soul-mate-- our own dear leader. I don't see why you're all so cynical.

    "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue... I was able to get a sense of his soul... He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship," Mr Bush said.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1392791.stm

    1. Re:Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ah yes...the infallible Bush gut instinct at work again.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    2. Re:Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know, I strongly suspect that goat entrails are more reliable at divining truth than Bush's entrails.

    3. Re:Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul by Nimey · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm willing to set up an experiment to see whether that's true.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    4. Re:Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul by hxnwix · · Score: 1

      Bush on why Harriet Myers, who has never served as a judge, ought to be a justice of the US supreme court: "I've known Harriet for more than a decade, I know her heart." "She's a good woman."

      Bush on why Bin Laden is not a priority: "Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all."

      Bush naming his favorite philosopher: "Christ, because he changed my heart."

      Bush on the Iraq debacle: "God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq."

      Bush on himself: "Fool me once, shame on, shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again."

      Bush on Putin: "the more I get to know President Putin, the more I get to see his heart and soul..."

      Putin on Bush's re-election 2004: "I can only feel joy the American people made the most sensible decision"

      Putin on what Putin really thinks: "First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century."

      Bush on Clinton: "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is." (On Kosovo, Houston Chronicle; April 9, 1999)

      Bush on what Bush really thinks: "Well, I think if you say you're going to do something and don't do it, that's trustworthiness."

    5. Re:Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mackenzie King about Hitler.

      He wrote, "My sizing up of the man as I sat and talked with him was that he is really one who truly loves his fellow-men, and his country, and would make any sacrifice for their good. Hitler appeared to be a man of deep sincerity and a genuine patriot. (Diary, June 29, 1937)"

      King saw similarities between himself and Hitler, writing, "As I talked with him, I could not but think of Joan of Arc. He is distinctly a mystic .... He is a teetotaller and also a vegetarian; is unmarried, abstemist in all his habits and ways." (Diary, June 29, 1937)

  11. Re:Sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like "their" not taking English lessons either!

  12. Moving... by shmlco · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States." ...and then what? Putting it outside Russia means that blocking it's IP is probably easier to do, not harder. Then again, if I was doing it I'd let it run... and see who drops in.

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    1. Re:Moving... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What would probably happen is that Putin would keep the site up ... and pull the plug on the site operators.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Moving... by oneplus999 · · Score: 1

      hen again, if I was doing it I'd let it run... and see who drops in. in soviet russia, online media watches YOU! wait its not funny if its true
    3. Re:Moving... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Social Engineering 2.0: Fuck it, just have people shot.

    4. Re:Moving... by adona1 · · Score: 1

      However, I'm amazed by how far down I had to scroll to find an "In Soviet Russia" joke. Seems there really is a time when something is too obvious for Slashdot! ;)

      --
      Between the falling angel and the rising ape
    5. Re:Moving... by Alioth · · Score: 1

      No, it just means the site maintainers mysteriously drop dead from irradiation from polonium-210.

  13. Joking aside... by TheGreatHegemon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is worrying. I personally feel Russia has been taking steps back as far as civil liberty goes, really I feel that the whole WORLD has been taking steps back.

    The internet is being reigned in now - this was possibly the last great refuge for free speech...

    Rather worrying.

    1. Re:Joking aside... by Patrick+Mannion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, and that's not obvious enough, what with the constant murder of sources and journalists in Russia? Have you been living under a rock for two years!?

      --
      In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
    2. Re:Joking aside... by Monsuco · · Score: 1

      The internet is being reigned in now - this was possibly the last great refuge for free speech...

      Does anybody but me find it ironic that the number one place people complain about threats to internet free speech and censorship is the internet itself?
    3. Re:Joking aside... by Lordpidey · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, I think he didn't want anyone from the Russian government visiting him. They are very aggressive when people accuse them of murdering jour :ALKFJH:LKASHFKJHFDASJ ^[NO CARRIER]

      --
      Some people encrypt by using rot-13 twice. I prefer the more secure method of using rot-1 a total of twenty six times.
    4. Re:Joking aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...I feel that the whole WORLD has been taking steps back.

      Yes, and U.S. is leading the way to what some feel is fascist theocracy.
    5. Re:Joking aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Governments expand throughout their lifetimes, both in revenue and power over the people. This is the natural course of power, and history has proven it over and over again. Power breeds more power, and that's the bottom line.

      Moreover, no government in the history of organized coercion has ever significantly and permanently reduced its power through the process of democracy. That's a very important point to consider. The US government, originally founded on the principles of strictly limited power, personal liberty, and human rights, didn't take long to start its slide into authoritarianism. Today the US government is the most expensive, most powerful world superpower government and empire that has ever existed, with military bases in some 150 countries around the world. Sit down and consider that for a minute: from strictly limited government to world empire in less than 200 years.

      So what do we do about it? I don't know, but I do know two things: (1) life is short, and (2) when liberty does prevail, it is quickly overturned and assimilated by the black hole of government. The best you can do is keep a low profile, practice your god-given right to freedom to the greatest extent possible (engage in "civil disobediance"), or possibly move to a country where the ruling power is slightly behind on its course to authoritarianism.

    6. Re:Joking aside... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap, you FEEL Russia has been taking steps back??

      Putin has grabbed more power in the last few years than anyone on the planet.
      Get your head out of your ass and state some FACTS.

  14. Re:Sounds like... by caramelcarrot · · Score: 1

    Will all political websites eventually have to be hosted in another country? Maybe mutual swaps? US and neo-USSR, France and Britain, China and India.

  15. Turkey not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was just in Turkey and was able to visit every website I wanted which included newsites that were critical of AKP and other political parties and leaders in Turkey. Also, more importantly, porn sites can be reached without any problems.

    If you insult the founder of Turkey -- whose dead and thus not running for election -- then you get into trouble. Usually insulting the current PM - Erdogan - may get you sued by Erdogan but not likely your website is going to be blocked.

    China and Turkey are quite different in their levels of censorship. Critical political commentary is very common in the media in Turkey. This is an election year in Turkey too and I don't think you'll see any censorship of political opinion.

    1. Re:Turkey not so bad by Plutonite · · Score: 1

      Also, more importantly, porn sites can be reached without any problems. Ah, a true slashdotter who knows his priorities. *Takes hat off*
    2. Re:Turkey not so bad by The+Bungi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you insult the founder of Turkey -- whose dead and thus not running for election -- then you get into trouble.

      Yeah well, so it's not "so good" after all, right?

      Freedom of expression is not a relative concept. You either have it or you don't.

    3. Re:Turkey not so bad by krbvroc1 · · Score: 3

      Oh yeah, how many websites on the Armenian genocide can you bring up in Turkey? Journalists have gone to prison or been murdered for reporting on the Aemenian genocide of 1915 which Turkey denies. Its considered an 'insult to Turkishness' which will bring the wrath of the government upon you. Were you able to reach those?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_301_(Turkish_ penal_code)

    4. Re:Turkey not so bad by glwtta · · Score: 1

      Freedom of expression is not a relative concept. You either have it or you don't.

      Damn straight! Unless you live somewhere where you have limited freedom of expression, in which case the degree of censorship becomes quite relevant.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    5. Re:Turkey not so bad by Kristoph · · Score: 1

      Yes, actually, you can. (Although your other points regarding the repression of the information related to the Armenian genocide is quite valid).

      ]{

    6. Re:Turkey not so bad by krbvroc1 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the feedback. Apparently I have violated Article 301 of the Slashdot code 'insult to Slashdottedness', because my informative and valid rebuttal to the posters 'Turkey not so bad', complete with a Wikipedia link, was modded as flamebait.

    7. Re:Turkey not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, in some parts of America you can't spit on the flag in public without getting into trouble with the redneck soldier types. What's your point about freedom of expression again?

    8. Re:Turkey not so bad by ImdatS · · Score: 1

      I have to second that, I am right now in China and I can't access Wikipedia, BBC and lots of other websites. Wikipedia being really a big problem since I am doing some analysis and would like to get some definitions - at least my EB subscription works.

      Turkey usually has no filter/Great Firewall. The issue with YouTube was that it was blocked on the IP-Level, the Great Firewall here filters and analyzes the content. That's a big difference.

      And in Turkey, there is a mass of government critical websites, magazines (checkout Leman, ahref=http://www.leman.com.tr/index.php?kapakrel=u rl2html-690http://www.leman.com.tr/index.php?kapak >, Penguen http://www.penguen.com/, Girgir - these being satirical magazines), newspapers, and TV stations.

      The issues in Turkey are: Insulting Turkishness (whatever that means ;-), Ataturk (which is a bit understandable) and the Army (which is not understandable). This has to been seen on historical grounds (check out Turkish History @ Wikipedia). Still, it is not what unlimited free speech should be. The issue regarding Genozid on Armenians is an ongoing discussion in Turkey and I believe Turkey *will* come clean in about 5-10 years time on that - late but not too late?

      In Germany (where I live), it is also forbidden to deny Holocaust. Not that I would, but this is also limit on Free Speech. The same in France.

      You guys living in US should really value your freedom of speech and finally understand how free a country you have - even compared to Western Europe!

    9. Re:Turkey not so bad by yankI · · Score: 1

      You were not modded down because of 'insult to Slashdottedness'. You were modded down because you didn't read the 301 article from Wikipedia and you made claims that the Turkish government is mass blocking every website that has some info on a controversial topic in Turkey. I prepared much of the article on 301 on tr.wikipedia.org. I am aware that many people were tried over their thoughts (or expressions) on the Armenian genocide. But, there is no single person who has not been acquitted in courts related to this issue. Last person who was tried was Tamer Akcam, a scholar that defends Armenian genocide, and he was acquitted because the judge thought that `freedom of expression` gives him the right to do so. And about blocking sites: This is how the procedure works AFAIK. Somebody complains about the source of the information to a court. If the court decides on an injunction Turkey's ISPs are informed about the site and the site is blocked. Every blocked site also shows up on users' browser as a page that details the court order and the date. Again, in the last 5 years the only site that was blocked through this procedure was youtube. Otherwise people are freely accessing the Internet over there, (till another injunction of course).

    10. Re:Turkey not so bad by krbvroc1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I did read the Wiki article. And I recently watched a 'Frontline/World' segment on the increasing number of Journalists killed/jailed in varies countries...Russia..Iraq..Turkey. I had a segment on Hrant Dink who was murdered. I believe he was given a six-month 'suspended' sentence before being murdered. I also recently stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.

      I didn't make a claim that the Turkish gov't was mass blocking every website. I asked the poster who claimed 'Turkey is not so bad', if based on his recent trip/experience, he was able to access
      website about the Armenian genocide. He only reported on AKP/political websites and porn. After re-reading it, I can see it might come across that way, because I prefaced my question with 'Oh Yeah'--but I asked the question twice in the that post. Certainly not worthy of 'flaimbait'. I did state the the 'wrath of the gov't' was being applied and I think that is true, right? Being hauled into the court system because of a free speech comment seems like the wrath of the government to me. Certainly not in line with 'not so bad'. The power of a gov't to arrest, detain, fine, and try can be a powerful deterrent to free speech for many.

      Go read the Reporters with Borders 2006 Annual Report on Turkey (link below). You will see that people are still being heavily fined and jailed for various censorship reasons. Previous years reports are there too.

      http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=17482

    11. Re:Turkey not so bad by truehand · · Score: 1
      I agree it's not so bad.

      The Youtube closure was effective only for one day and the ban was due to a court decision. It was not invoked by the goverment or it wasn't an arbitrary decision. Youtube eventually apologized and removed the video. The other day, a group of young people in Turkey appealed against the ruling which they claimed to be against free speech, and eventually the court lifted the ban.

      Like anywhere in Europe, courts have to give their verdict according to laws. Ataturk was the founder of modern Turkey, and as a tribute to his contributions and revolutionizing the country, the parliment long time ago issued a special penal code regarding insults to him etc., which is still effective. Turkey's justice system is attached to the European laws. It could never be a China or Russia. Any European/Turkish citizen has the right to bring something that he is not happy with to the attention of the European court of Human Rights (ECHR). All decisions have to be obeyed by Turkey. and if necessary, Turkey has to change its laws to abide the rulings of the European courts! (Google it!)

      There is no any other case in which a web site was banned in Turkey. Even the ones supporting the Armenian genocide. I don't understand people who say "journalist were murdered because they supported the genocide claims" or "talking about the Armenian issue is a crime" etc... This is simply not true!

      Halil Berktay (look in Wikipedia) is a well known Turkish historian who is supporting the Armenian Genocide. He was not convicted because of his academic studies/thoughts regarding this issue.

    12. Re:Turkey not so bad by yankI · · Score: 1

      I am aware of the freedom of speech issues in Turkey and I am not really happy with the situations. I want the TCK 301 to be abolished permanently and I want to see more improvements in other areas also. My point is this: There are issues with freedom of expression and more. But it is going for better, not for worse. It was only 6 years ago when people were arrested and tortured regulary, military judges were trying civilians in courts, and people would frequently 'go missing' under police custody. I and many other people wish for better but it is not going to happen if people distort reality and does not recognise the improvements.

    13. Re:Turkey not so bad by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Freedom of expression is not a relative concept. You either have it or you don't. It's relative. There's no place in the world where you have 100% freedom of expression. Some places are worse than others.
  16. Yes by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    And then they'll end up in a very unfortunate accident like that former KGB officer in Britain and his buddy in Maryland... Putin has such a way of dealing with his critics...

  17. Here we go again... by zappepcs · · Score: 1

    I wonder how long it will be before the revolts.... Turkey, China, Russia and the US to some extent, I wonder how long it will take till we can say:

    In Soviet Russia, Internet censors you

    1. Re:Here we go again... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Granted, China has thousands of spirited protests each year and Turkey is tenuously held together by a dominant military. But who is revolting in Russia or the US? Yes, Russia has Chechnya - but how would that lead to a popular revolt? And then there's the US... the only people I see getting really fired up these days are some fringe weirdos that travel around and show up at every protest, be it anti-war, anti-globalism, political conventions, or whatever. Seriously, walk around one of these events - it's the same groups every time. Are these folks going to burn Washington?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  18. Of lollipops and elections by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some politicians kiss babies, Putin goes straight for the Primary schoolers.

    Hmm, I wish I could find a link to that... blockedski, WTFski?!?!

  19. When will the 'Man' learn? by haluness · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We're in the 21st century. We've got the Internet, everybody (ok, most) is aware of blogs and the relocatability of information sources.

    So when will institutions learn that times have changed?

    1. Re:When will the 'Man' learn? by Miseph · · Score: 1

      The alternative is that they start locating the actual authors and killing or imprisoning them, because they sure as hell aren't going to stop.

      Politics 101, those in power will do anything to stay in power, and those without are powerless to get it.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    2. Re:When will the 'Man' learn? by istartedi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "The man" doesn't learn. Not in the traditional sense. The man can only be usurped. Then there's a new man, and the cycle repeats. This usurping doesn't necessarily have to be violent. Every shift in power in Congress or the Presidency is a mild form of usurping. Even if it's *somewhat* violent, it doesn't have to totally destroy society (e.g., the US civil rights movement). Of course, examples of violent revolution are, unfortunately, all too common, and the "new boss" is often worse than the old boss; but the point is, the boss or "the man" itself doesn't learn, at least I can't think of any examples.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  20. Thank God for the US by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1

    Always there to give freedom!

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  21. Nice Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Putin's successor Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. .oh man, that's a good one. Oh wait, you're serious aren't you? Take a closer look at Russian politics before you post such silly shit.
  22. The difference ... by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    You mean western, modern nations are not run by the mafia? "The mafia is a kind of organized crime being active not only in several illegal fields, but also tending to exercise sovereignty functions - normally belonging to public authorities - over a specific territory..." Seems to me the key difference is whether the people running things are in public view or not - and even in western, modern nations the people running things are rarely those in public view.


    Well, the major difference is that in the U.S., and in many other countries, the "mafia" have achieved enough power to effectively legitimatize their business models, and in some cases even protect them from competition, with the weight of law.

    Why work against the government, when for a few million bucks, you can make it work for you?
    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:The difference ... by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      Why work against the government, when for a few million bucks, you can make it work for you?

      Uh, Dr. Evil, one million dollars isn't what it used to be . . .

    2. Re:The difference ... by kubrick · · Score: 1

      Sure, but politicians are cheap.

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  23. Obligatory by pwizard2 · · Score: 1

    In post-Soviet Russia, government STILL controls you!

    --
    "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
  24. migrating off shore by z3d4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States."

    Fair trade. the US gets the anti-Putin sites, and Russia gets the Torrent servers after the RIAA pulls the plug in the US.

    Meanwhile, Canada gets the former US internet radio streams.

    'The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers'

    --
    You shall know him by his Sig
  25. Putin is Stalin today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make sure that nothing has changed in Russia.
    After a brief period of freedom "öttepel" Russia is back under apparatchiks dictatorship.
    And they want Georigia, Ukraine, Estonia, Lithuania, etc. - all free countries of the ex-USSR back under their control.
    I really hope Bush and Congress will show Putin who he is and where he belongs!

  26. The alternative? by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Would you have rather had Bush tell the truth (Putin, you're a psychopathic douche bag!) and pissed him off? I, for one, would rather Bush tell him a flattering lie than further strain relations with Russia.

    1. Re:The alternative? by maxume · · Score: 1

      There are no, and have never been, any political exigencies, ever. duh.

      Of course, if that were true, political wouldn't be a word.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:The alternative? by Guuge · · Score: 1

      Read the Bush quotation again. He was talking to us, not Putin. I personally don't think the president has any business lying to his own people. Do you?

  27. ISR by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    In Post-Soviet Russia, the government reports on the media.

    Sorry, everyone. I don't have a proper meme joke for this one.

  28. elections in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, the Russian authorities protect their election process from the foreign interference. In April's report of American State Department it clearly stated that USA is very positive on financing and interfering elections in Russia. According to Russian Constitution, or any other Constitution of any other country, activities directed to get involved with the inner politic situation and attempts to manipulate it are considered unconstitutional and criminal. And the hands of American Government are very long, so it just a measure of their government to prevent foreign meddling into their politic life.
    by Nigmatov N.

  29. Re:Sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    another reason to get onto anonet

  30. Yet another example of journalistic malpractice? by pawngrabber · · Score: 1

    American Journalism and Russia's Tragedy
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20001002/cohen

    The Media's New Cold War
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050131/cohen

    More on the true agenda hidden behind the "spread of democracy" propaganda carried out by our own influential media...
    http://www.thenation.com/directory/bios/stephen_f_ cohen

  31. lol!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's actually one of the more original ones. Mods, please be generous to the AC on this one.

  32. This is what happens when you fail by noidentity · · Score: 1

    to give your post a proper subject and instead treat it as the beginning of your comment.

    (sorry, peeve of mine)

  33. COCK-BENIS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BIG PENIS. Fuckin' heck is's russia againin PUTIN is doing thi ---- shit. i TELL youy is't amazing what's going on here. I can't believe this would happen. It's not suprising that this would happen.Enough soviet russia jokes! I can't believe it.

  34. Since we just LOVE soviet russia jokes... by GFree · · Score: 2, Funny

    In Russia Soviet, Dyslexia for cure found.

  35. Ironic by Dan+East · · Score: 1

    This could be rather ironic. There are, um, certain things I've googled for in the past where the most effective results were obtained with site:*.ru. Looks like we might be returning the favor to the Russians soon.

    Dan East

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  36. Mod this up, fuckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do it.

  37. don't worry - be happy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow. how dreadful it must be to live in a country where you will receive a visit from the secret police if you dare criticize the president.

  38. enemies by zoftie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... " If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States." ...

    Then it becomes enemy, imperialist propaganda and immediately discarded as such. To have legitimacy sites must be located within the country.
    2c

  39. Parent Article: (-1, Troll) by ezh · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Bloomberg, just stop trolling with your articles. All the online press that Russians actually bother reading is already licensed by the Ministry of Press, TV Broadcast and Mass Media of the Russian Federation: Same goes for the most popular blog services: None of these businesses is going to risk their investments. The irony is that it is exactly the same in the U.S. as well - big companies just support one of the two candidates and nobody cares about the smaller ones. So Bloomberg and the rest, stop scaring your people while attempting to control them. And you, /. - take note. Cheers!
    1. Re:Parent Article: (-1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheers! Finally a sensible comment!

    2. Re:Parent Article: (-1, Troll) by ImdatS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only "small" difference being that you don't get shot on the street, polonimized, or otherwise rm -rf'd in the US for writing something anti-government or anti-establishment.

      Guy, get a sense for reality! I am also doing business in Russia and China and to be honest, on a pure-personal level, I prefer doing business in China especially because I don't get shot down on the street publishing government-critical info - in China they just invalidate your business/media license or block you otherwise, but don't really kill you. Of course, you have the same other problems as well (no rule of law, being cheated, etc) - but you *know* this and these things are not life threatening.

      Man, you really should get a sense of reality - maybe you should leave your safe country and visit those other countries and do a reality-check (or, if you are Russian, what I assume, you should leave for a while and check-out what freedemom of speech really means e.g. in US, UK, Switzerland, etc.)

      And with respect to the links you posted: They are fully government-controlled/censored, don't tell bullshit here just because people can't check it out because they can't read russian/cyrillic. Licensed by Ministry of Press is Newspeak for "fully controlled and censored my MoP".

    3. Re:Parent Article: (-1, Troll) by Burz · · Score: 1

      If you paid attention to what went on in US military protectorates and occupied territories like Iraq, Columbia, Guatemala, Philippines, Haiti, former Yugoslavia and even the EU, then you wouldn't be so cocky about your "sense of reality".

      The number of foreign journalists US soldiers have (enthusiastically, I might add) attacked in Iraq outclasses anything you are likely to find from Russia over the same time period. What a lucky thing US corporate media were 'embedded' with the military, a proposition that was probably decided as necessary at some point given the Bush administration's determination to control public perception and eliminate foreign news sources that could broadcast embarrassing information.

      Of course that's all excusable because of the war, right? And we'll just forget that Russia has a war raging within its own borders, against hostiles who have demonstrated a certain proclivity for terrorist tactics.

      But nevermind, just you keep wagging that finger and be thankful the embedded-ones have given you a reason to feel proud to be a US'er again.

    4. Re:Parent Article: (-1, Troll) by Mondor · · Score: 1

      Couldn't agree more.

    5. Re:Parent Article: (-1, Troll) by Raenex · · Score: 1

      The irony is that it is exactly the same in the U.S. as well - big companies just support one of the two candidates and nobody cares about the smaller ones. You don't have to register your blog or newspaper with the US goverment. Harshly criticising the president and government is standard practice in the United States. Your point is well taken that most of the attention is focused on the big candidates, but that's just the network effect.
  40. Just the newest fad by Thexare+Blademoon · · Score: 0

    This isn't the first article we've seen about this, though perhaps the first about Russia. It won't be the last, either; people seek to control what they do not - or perhaps cannot - understand. It's an unfortunate fact of life: ignorance breeds fear.

  41. Only some channels need to be controlled by orzetto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However, unless the Kremlin pursues Chinese-style/Turkish-style blocking of the Internet-Protocol addresses of web sites like 'The Economist', even the Kremlin cannot control the online media.

    Now, if a sizeable chunk of the Russian electorate had Internet connectivity and could read English, that would be a problem. Why is everybody assuming every Russian can read English? How many of us can read Russian?

    The main point being, in a "nominal" democracy you need to control only 50%+1 of the electorate. Information channels that are available to only a tiny fraction of the population are irrelevant to censorship. In Italy (not as badly censored as Russia... yet) you can find bunches of books denouncing Berlusconi's mafia acquaintances, corruption, and the suspicious sources of his wealth in his own bookstores: that's because few Italians read books (or newspapers for that sake). Try say anything even alluding in that direction on television, and you get fired so fast your ass leaves skid marks through the parking lot. It has not even gotten much better now that Berlusconi is in opposition because he still retains his private power.

    --
    Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    1. Re:Only some channels need to be controlled by temcat · · Score: 1

      Now that's what I call really insightful. Take Echo Moskvy radio station (http://www.echo.msk.ru) as an example: despite being owned by Gazprom, state gas monopoly, it's largely in a fierce opposition to Putin's regime. The answer is simple: they have negligible reach as far as air broadcasting goes, and Internet is an everyday news source for a relatively small percent of people (smth. like 20-30%). At the same time, all radio and TV stations that cover most of the country are effectively tightly controlled by the state.

    2. Re:Only some channels need to be controlled by StryfeX · · Score: 1

      Wow, to leave skid marks in the parking lot... That musta been some bad spaghetti.

      --StryfeX

  42. The Chinese government "Man" has learned by Infonaut · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So when will institutions learn that times have changed?

    The lesson is that there is no longer one Internet. There are multiple internets, filtered to suit the needs of national leaders. They've proven that they can control their own tidy filtered internets. Don't believe me? Just ask Yahoo! about what the French government can do. The irony with the Yahoo! case is that the suit was originally brought not by The Government in France, but by a well-meaning French anti-Nazi group.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  43. pure irony by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    notice all of the subject change comments in this thread to criticism of the usa/ bush. right over the head of anyone who makes such a comment or mods such a comment up is that... drum roll please... THEY CAN MAKE THAT COMMENT IN THE USA WITH NO REPERCUSSIONS

    the issue here is that criticism of putin/ the russian government within russia is being censored. everyone get that? has the meaning of that observation sunk into your head yet? really?

    now go ahead and bash the usa, criticize bush all you want, and mod such comments up... in this thread... about russian censorship

    !?

    you're absolutely free to do so. get it yet?

    fashionable anti-americanism is no replacement for a functional brain. if in the context of commenting on russian censorship you still think it is somehow useful to bash the usa, all you are doing is making yourself look like a fool. you are just demonstrating your own lack of an elementary school level skillset at compare and contrast. it's amazing how prejudice blinds

    now don't get me wrong, the usa does plenty of wrong in this world (and plenty right... how's that thunderbolt of moderation strike you?), but to criticize a country with much better freedoms than russia (i said much better, not perfect, do you understand that difference?), in a thread about russian censorship, is just pure idiocy on the part of anyone who does so. all you do is make yourself look like a moron

    really, you're a moron if you think bashing the usa in this thread is useful, insightful, interesting, whatever. 100% unadulterated low iq cretin = you

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:pure irony by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      To be fair, I can criticize Putin here in Russia just fine as well. In private speech and on the 'Net, certainly. It's when the criticism gets to mass media the government starts acting. No jail times and the like, it might just happen that e.g. the place you were supposed to hold your public speech at is suddenly closed for inspection due to "fire code violations" or "non-compliant sanitary condition" (happened with a few more prominent opposition leaders recently), or the newspaper office gets a visit from tax inspection. They do begin to assert control over the 'Net as well now, though, mostly because it's the last bastion where the opposition still has a strong presence. But it's all nowhere near China, for example.

    2. Re:pure irony by fudoniten · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Free speech is better in America than it is in some other country, where it's really bad! Get it? So you shouldn't complain at all about losing yours bit by bit! Do you understand? You look like an idiot!

    3. Re:pure irony by Prof+Kayyos · · Score: 1

      Yes, I totally agree with you and further agree with others above that some effort may be made to control any anti-Putin info on many boards. I recently had occasion to review much more info than I wanted to primarily on the Chernobyl accident. Billions of words but most of them nothing more than a report on another report, etc... A lot of bullshit. One Russian report claims something on the order of 10K dead in a 40 year time spread after the accident while another report by a group in the United Kingdom claims a mere 54 (yes 54) total deaths due to the explosion over a 40 year basis. A Russian reports claims 43K persons lived in the closest city at the time of the explosion. Another Russian report claims 150K persons. Russians reported using over 500,000 persons to clean up Chernobyl and build the sarcophogus which entombs it now. These people were lied to, taken advantage of, and often times made 5 or 10 trips inside highly radioactive areas to do anything ranging from damage assessment to cleanup. The Russians promised to follow up on all those who participated. At this point there are thousands in hospitals with various fallout caused diseases. Many of the sick were exposed directly to molton core material. I guess my long winded point is this. Russia is no better than they have ever been in the past. Lie, force, kill, jail, you name it. If you think for one second that things have gotten better there and things have gotten worse here you are crazy. Please discuss...

  44. Aw, man! by FlyByPC · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I go out shopping, and a whole THREAD dedicated to the Soviet Russia meme comes along! Tanj, as Larry Niven would say.

    Well, better late than never.

    In Soviet Russia, the government monitors the blogs!

    --
    Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
  45. Yakov Smirnoff..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 1

    The only good thing that could come out of this is now Yakov Smirnoff will have a fresh supply of material for some fresh new "In Soviet Russia....." jokes.

    First, the State took over the Oil industry. Now, they want to take over the media. But they maintain they are a democratic government. I call it "Stealth Communism": Communism that looks like something nice, but smells like something not-so-nice.

    "The first time I went to a restaurant, they asked me 'How many in your party?' and I said "Six hundred million." ----- Yakov Smirnoff

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
    1. Re:Yakov Smirnoff..... by TechForensics · · Score: 1
      Yakov Smirnoff also said: "I went to American supermarket for first time. So many things! I have money for only one. I buy product called Tampax. It say on box, "You can go swimming! You can go dancing!"

      ...ducking as the negative mod points whistle in like mortar rounds...

      --
      Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
    2. Re:Yakov Smirnoff..... by ImdatS · · Score: 1

      Free and independent media is one of the most important requirements for a democracy to work. Without that there will be no democracy at all. It just doesn't work.

      The root of democracy is not so much the fact that people have the right to vote but that people are informed - via free and independtend sources, independent of any government, political party, and such.

      The right to vote comes after that. If you have fully functioning independent media, you will have the means to make your government accountable. The means for changing a governemnt not fitting your requirements is then the universal suffrage - elections! (well, as you know, it's not that easy, but you get the picture).

      Don't forget that Government means "Representants of the People" - nothing more, nothing less. They're supposed to represent *us* and not themselfes.

      In Soviet Russia (and in Zsarist Russia of 2007), You represent the Government!

  46. Cybercrime treaty? by Misch · · Score: 1

    What about the Cybercrime treaty the US signed? Is Russia a signatory to the treaty? Will the US have to enfrce Russia's laws?

    --

    --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
  47. i need to tweak the anti-russianism here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    first off, russia is not doing anything that every other country in the world does: act like a hypocrite. complain about another country doing xyz, while at the same time doing xyz as well

    however, anyone who thinks russia is special does need a comeuppance: russia is just as hypocritical as china or the usa or india or the majority of every other country in the world. at the same time, that observation is a double edged sword: russia is no better, and NO WORSE, than these countries. seriously, find a crime russia does, and tell me the majority of other countries in the world aren't guilty of the same thing

    so the anti-russianism needs to be tweaked: russia is not special and good, so if you thought it was, you need a spanking. at the same time, all the rabid anti-russia types need to check themselves if they think russia deserves special prosecution for crimes every country is guilty of. all that needs to change is that the rabid patriotic russians need to wake up and admit they are wrong... the rabid anti-russians are STILL wrong, and always have been wrong

    the only people with any valid opinion of russia are those who do not especially love russia, nor especially hate it. russia does evil, russia does good. much like every other country in the world. this balanced attitude is the only valid opinion. any other opinion is partisan propaganda, brain dead and unfair, whether anti-russia, or pro-russia

    russia is not special. not especially good, and not especially evil, either. listen up, braindead partisans

  48. you do know by superwiz · · Score: 1

    they simply kill those who descent too vocally? regardless of whether they are in russia or say... london?

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  49. The question is what will be done? by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    The question is what will Russians do? (What will Chinese do? What will Turks do?)

    Nothing.

    And nobody will give a damn about this situation until economical situation significantly deteriorates. People rallying here for "rights" do not understand that mere existence of "rights" in Western country is a result of good economic shape not vice versa.

    And economy does not have ideological preferences. It can be blooming in fairly autocratic societies like China or Chile (during Pinochet times) or Singapour or it could be really struggling (Eltsyn times were pretty democratic in Russia compared to China or Soviet Union).

    People tend to forger that freedom of speech and other political freedoms are secondary to economic freedoms: freedom to eat at least once a day, freedom to have a house in winter, freedom of not to be killed everyday by gangs and people won't give a dman about the first ones until the more basic ones are not in a reasonable shape.

    Rise of Nazis in Germany is clear example of that.

    So as long as Russian economy is strong, people in Russia will just yak about your so precious YRO, but do zilch.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  50. Don't eat the sushi. by cno3 · · Score: 1

    If I ran an anti-Putin web site, I would be concerned about any offers to eat out at a Japanese restaurant.

  51. Re:Sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FSB also have the "K" squad, elite govt sponsored hackers

  52. You need to get over yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Did you RTFineA? The point is that Russia is COMMITTING MORE CENSORSHIP than everybody but China. This isn't about them creating a whole new kind of badness that no other country is doing, it's about them doing a metric crap-load more of it.

    Despite what the chattering-heads may say, trying to stay in the middle of the road just means you never get anywhere.

  53. Looks that way, Vlad by paladinwannabe2 · · Score: 1

    And I'm glad to see that Vlad Fedorov has joined him, so that they can continue their eternal flamewar from Wikipedia onto /.. Locked in eternal struggle, they shall continue until the end of all things.

    --
    You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
  54. enough with this shit already by ndg66 · · Score: 1

    "Oh yeah, how many websites on the Armenian genocide can you bring up in Turkey?"

    How about every single one of them? Actually, none of the websites about the genocide are banned. It is not illegal to talk about the genocide, nor to accept it. The crushing majority still denies it, and would hate your guts if you supported the claims, but they can't legally do anything.

    No journalist have gone to prison for reporting on Armenian genocide. Hrant Dink got convicted of "insulting turkishness" because of a misinterpretation of a article he wrote in newspaper. His sentence was "postponed", which really meant that he wouldn't really serve it if he didn't get convicted of the same charges. (Since it was a misinterpretation, it was unlikely)

    Coincidentally, he was talking about how the Armenians should leave aside the bad blood between Turks and them. (The mistranslation was kind of like "Armenians should get rid of the bad blood of Turks in their veins.)

    It wasn't the state who prosecuted Hrant Dink, it was a private lawyer called Kemal Kerincsiz, a fascist jackass who only pressed charges to draw attention to himself. He also pressed charges against other prominent public figures who supported the Genocide. Nevertheless, all these charges were dismissed by the courts, since article 301 is very vague and doesn't really say anything about genocide. This in turn put Hrant in the crosshairs of an über-nationalistic minority, and he got murdered.

    While everybody knows that he got murdered, no one here really mentions that more than 50.000 people marched in his funeral, shouting out "We're all Hrant, we're all armenians!". That's the single most number of people attending a civilian funeral in Turkey. (barring aside the ex presidents and such.) (link : http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/2 3/1530254)

    Denying the genocide doesn't make it go away, but making it illegal to say that it didn't happen doesn't necesserally make it right neither, as in France. (link : http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/19/opinion/edk inik.php)

    Freedom of speech means you have to be willing to hear both sides, right or wrong.

  55. Bloomberg runs an anti-Putin story by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    And this is news how?

    Personally I think we need to run Putin for US President in the next election - with British MP George Galloway as the VP running mate. At least we'd have an INTELLIGENT President and a VP who can talk straight.

    Anything is better than what we have now - and all of the candidates the Dems are fielding are no better.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  56. Russophobia. So easy to get away with. by Burz · · Score: 1

    ...just as with the hysteria over Iraq and Iran.

  57. take all of those crimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now compare it to things china does

    or the usa

    why does the things russia does stand out as especially egregious? i see the same level of stink and hypocrisy and arrogance and evil in all 3 countries. so why aren't you hating the usa or china?

    if, however, you have "fallen out of love" with russia, well ok then. just be balanced when you assess the crimes of russia against the crimes of other countries. i think you'll find russia does wrong to the same degree as the majority of other countries. therefore, it is not to be loved. but it is also not to be hated, or, not hated anymore than you would hate any other countries

  58. you're wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you write a ten page paper, and in 95% of that paper you criticize russia, and then at the end you say "oh, btw, other countries do bad things too" you are not a moral or intellectual person

    the very essence of morality and justice is being fair and balanced

    the very essence of logic and reason is considering all your bases

    so you must be balanced and fair in your world view, and that means being... actually balanced and fair in your world view. i don't know how to make it any simpler than that

    so you are wrong. you need to criticize all crimes by all countries in the proportionaly of the crimes they commit, or you are just a partisan political hack

    if you spend all of your time micro analyzing the crimes of only one player on the world stage, exactly what value do you think you have in the search for justice?

  59. Déjà vu by lpress · · Score: 1
    The Kremlin tried to shut the nascent Russian Internet -- mostly UUCP at the time -- down during the 1991 coup attempt. You can read about that at http://bpastudio.csudh.edu/fac/lpress/articles/rel com.htm. It did not work then and it won't work now. As Mikhail Gorbachev said:

    We are witnessing a revolution of international relations toward increasingly open and mass-scale communication. And this greatly increases the role of creative and positive policies. But equally, it raises the price of mistakes -- the price we must pay for adherence to outdated dogmas, routine and old thinking.
  60. what about murdered reporters by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    that we keep hearing about in the west? a woman recently i believe, and the editor of forbes in moscow

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:what about murdered reporters by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The woman - Politkovskaya - was most likely murdered on the orders of the new pro-federal Chechen administration, not Kremlin directly. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the more persistent and known critics get silenced that way. It's just that it's not an immediate threat to every citizen or even every reporter in the country.

  61. and in america... by Lacrymology · · Score: 1

    you dont block IPs.. you just put people who excert their free speech in jail

  62. Re:Yet another example of journalistic malpractice by pawngrabber · · Score: 1

    Thanks. I'm glad to hear that there are rationally thinking people who are able to distinguish between unbiased and biased information...

  63. When Putin takes a dislike to US-based sites ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States.
    ... and Putin remains pissed off. So he puts a modest (say 20%) tax on oil being exported by companies based in or exporting to the site's hosting country. The speculators turn that into a 30 or 40% price rise on the spot market. So the oil price goes back up to $70+ per barrel, then carries on going. Bush is doing fine out of this personally, but as US gasoline prices approach reality the riots on the streets start shutting down cities.
    What was the price of free speech again? $75/barrel? $85? $95? The magic double-oh?

    Hey, what are the chances of some oil trading systems having an oil-price "millennium bug"? When I started in the industry I wouldn't have considered a 10-fold price increase realistic. But I've seen 8-fold already, and with prices on a steady rise (BBC commodity prices) it could be back into record-breaking territory by mid-May. $100/barrel by New Year? Party time!
    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"