Free Press in Russia

[Faux Pas]

Tim, then I stand corrected on who brought up the FSB.

I have no doubt their hands are dirty. Unlikely, they are directly involved with all incidents of beaten or murdered journalists but it's a pretty safe bet they are aware of it. Corrupt officials are nothing more than an above ground mafia and operate much the same way as the underground mafia. Nothing goes on in the lower echelons that the upper echelons are not aware of.

[Shadow]

Shadow, no doubt in my mind that you have your head stuck up your butt here. I just can't for the life of me understand why. McCarthyism? I don't get that connection but you are on the Hale Bopp.

You are the only one who has brought up FSB. You may not be aware that corruption does occur on many levels, local and municipal, provincial and national. Some of this they may or may not be involved in but, if you believe they don't know about it, that would just be further proof of your head in the sand.

Would it make you feel better if Baketev were murdered too? At least there would be some justification for seeing this nobody's face on the internet? The story of intimidated, beaten and murdered journalists continues.

Don't attempt to credit me with words or statements I haven't made. I never once said Russia is a nation of fools and idiots. Fools and idiots turn away and deny the truth when it's slapping them about the head and face. Your admiration of the FSB is blatantly obvious and duly noted.

The only factual statement you made "the truth is known inside Russia". It is ugly and it has everything to do with freedom of the press. It's the deniers such as yourself that help perpetuate that ugly truth and deny the populace in Russia of rights we in the West take for granted. If we don't identify and help eradicate those injustices we are as guilty as those committing the murders IMO

If I tell you the truth is known in Russia I mean that usually it is quite open.
The difference is that the Western media picks out only what they can use for negative. That has nothing to do with freedom of press, except perhaps the lack of freedom in Western press.

As for admiration of the FSB, I do not see them like you seem to do with the image from bad movies. I see their work more like it is in reality. Any FSB official who would attempt or order a murder on a public person would be fired on the spot.

A saying from Russia is that whoever is shot was no saint.
And this is what you seem to make of journalists.

[Shadow]

Tim, then I stand corrected on who brought up the FSB.

I have no doubt their hands are dirty. Unlikely, they are directly involved with all incidents of beaten or murdered journalists but it's a pretty safe bet they are aware of it. Corrupt officials are nothing more than an above ground mafia and operate much the same way as the underground mafia. Nothing goes on in the lower echelons that the upper echelons are not aware of.

Here I fully agree with you. And another thing is that in Russia any level has their limit. Cross the limit and you run the chance of being removed. It is a code of bandits, mixed with the principles of Orthodox religion. This is extremely hard to understand, and even harder to follow.

[Makkin]

Shadow,


   You have interesting insights and it seems it's easier to follow in actuality. Whenever the press of an inependent gets talking too much and has a crowd form it usually means action will be taken against them right?


makkin

[kievstar]

FauxPas, I think you very well know what I mean about attack.  A journalist can attack someone mainly through what they write and what others do with it.  They can write what they think is true or not true at all.  But most journalists know what is going to be the result of what they write.  You write information that impacts people they will take action against the journalist.  Its natural to take out your enemy. 

Corruption is a way of business in the USA and Russia.  America should clean itself before speaking about others.

For example Obama spoke this week in Ohio about a new plant the company I work for is building - 600 million usd investment.  His entire speech was a lie why the plant was going to be built there.  Had  nothing to do with Obama or politicians.  But if the company I work for spoke the truth I guarantee you that Obama would come up with some tax on us. In this case remained silent so Obama would not attack us. 

[Shadow]

Shadow,


   You have interesting insights and it seems it's easier to follow in actuality. Whenever the press of an inependent gets talking too much and has a crowd form it usually means action will be taken against them right?


makkin

I guess you did not get the subtle point.

Firstly, nobody is independent. Secondly, if a crowd forms one has to wonder who is in that crowd and what are their motives. Third, one can talk but one also has to take in consideration what the results of talks are.
In Russia you will have to answer for your words. Meaning that if you harm people innocently without a good reason, they are very likely to return the favour.

[innakrug]

She is in her mid 30's. Strangely enough she greatly cares about humanity as a whole but has little sympathy for those that are against improving Russia as she sees fit. She loves Putin's style as a hardcore leader for the country. I admire her Patriotism but I'm trying to get her to open her eyes that other people who are against Putin and his policies care about Russia just as much or more than her.

Is she planning to go back to Russia? Does she like it here in America? In my opinion Russia was never corrupted as it corrupted now. People do not have any protection there, it is no rights which guarantied to people.

[Shadow]

Is she planning to go back to Russia? Does she like it here in America? In my opinion Russia was never corrupted as it corrupted now. People do not have any protection there, it is no rights which guarantied to people.

BillyB's contact is living in Russia. As for rights, perhaps just the people in Moscow have them....

[Blues Fairy]

In Russia you will have to answer for your words. Meaning that if you harm people innocently without a good reason, they are very likely to return the favour.

Which means, there is no rule of law in Russia, just the eye for eye and tooth for tooth.  The strongest (richest, most powerful) survives.  How is that civilized and good?

[BillyB]

Is she planning to go back to Russia? Does she like it here in America? In my opinion Russia was never corrupted as it corrupted now. People do not have any protection there, it is no rights which guarantied to people.

She is the kind of person that sees life as a "glass half empty". The other week she had long term plans to stay in America. A few days ago going through some tough times say she hates it and will go back to Russia. Although she's patriotic, I reminded her that one she gets to Russia, she will hate it too because there are things she's told me about Russia she doesn't like such as how some of the people treated her which includes close relatives. She agreed. I told her she needs to focus on the positives instead of negatives of everywhere she goes and get to a place that's going to give her the most happiness.

BillyB's contact is living in Russia. As for rights, perhaps just the people in Moscow have them....

The RW I'm talking about is living in America.

[innakrug]

She is the kind of person that sees life as a "glass half empty". The other week she had long term plans to stay in America. A few days ago going through some tough times say she hates it and will go back to Russia. Although she's patriotic, I reminded her that one she gets to Russia, she will hate it too because there are things she's told me about Russia she doesn't like such as how some of the people treated her which includes close relatives. She agreed. I told her she needs to focus on the positives instead of negatives of everywhere she goes and get to a place that's going to give her the most happiness.

The RW I'm talking about is living in America.

Well, it is just hard for me to understand sometimes, some people would say how good it is in Russia and how much they hate it to be here in America. Why then they not going back? I love Russian people, but I do not like what is going on in Russia now.

[Shadow]

Which means, there is no rule of law in Russia, just the eye for eye and tooth for tooth.  The strongest (richest, most powerful) survives.  How is that civilized and good?

What is civilized in innocent people being harmed without being able to do anything ?

[Shadow]

The RW I'm talking about is living in America.

I stand corrected.

Your advice is sound, but she could always divide her time to have optimal happiness. 

[Blues Fairy]

What is civilized in innocent people being harmed without being able to do anything ?

Who is innocent?  The corrupt officials "harmed" by journalists exposing their corruption?  If they truly be innocent they should sue those journalists, not hire mobsters to beat them up or kill them.

[Shadow]

Who is innocent?  The corrupt officials "harmed" by journalists exposing their corruption?  If they truly be innocent they should sue those journalists, not hire mobsters to beat them up or kill them.

As you know in Russia people with money will not lose if sued for something they reached through dark practices. The bandits code on the other hand does not rely just on money.

As for who is innocent, neither the journalists nor the officials are. But the origin of the bullet is often not where Western press see it.

[Gator]

This is an example of the free press speech in the US.

 http://la-gun.com/email/manning

I am not a fan of Obama, yet Manning takes it too far.

What would happen to a Russian who would say such about Putin?  Would they recognize that the man is "off his rocker," or would the man be punished in some manner?

[Blues Fairy]

As you know in Russia people with money will not lose if sued for something they reached through dark practices. The bandits code on the other hand does not rely just on money.

As for who is innocent, neither the journalists nor the officials are. But the origin of the bullet is often not where Western press see it.

You've got it all mixed up.  I was talking about rich people or officials being exposed by journalists for corruption, and suing the journalist if these facts be false (instead of beating them up or killing them).  Who are you talking about?

And how are the beaten/killed journalists "not innocent"?  Facts, please?

Shadow you are just piling up nonsense, I don't understand a single sentence of yours.

[TwoBitBandit]

This is an example of the free press speech in the US.

 http://la-gun.com/email/manning

I am not a fan of Obama, yet Manning takes it too far.

What would happen to a Russian who would say such about Putin?  Would they recognize that the man is "off his rocker," or would the man be punished in some manner?

I agree and disagree.  This guy's tone is over the top.  He's got a few screws loose.

He nevertheless has a valid point.  Sooner or later, the welfare state is going to collapse.  Anyone capable of doing a little bit of math can see that.  Virtually all of the western governments are running deficits that can't be supported in the long term at any level of taxation or fiat currency schemes.  The demographics are unfavorable.  In my mind, there's no doubt that the welfare state can't go on as it is now.  When that happens, a lot of people on both sides (both the net providers and the net parasites) are going to be very unhappy.

The thing that's changed recently is that the cracks are starting to show.  Ten years ago, the problem was obvious to anyone who cared to study the problem, but there were no obvious cracks.

Now the cracks are obvious.  The problems we have with insolvent state governments, wholesale government manipulation of the financial system, lack of transparency, unsustainable pension schemes, cities declaring bankruptcy, riots in Europe, etc. are making it clear that the problem is now on us and the piper needs to be paid.

[Shadow]

This is an example of the free press speech in the US.

 http://la-gun.com/email/manning

I am not a fan of Obama, yet Manning takes it too far.

What would happen to a Russian who would say such about Putin?  Would they recognize that the man is "off his rocker," or would the man be punished in some manner?

They will take him for the clown he is. 

[Shadow]

You've got it all mixed up.  I was talking about rich people or officials being exposed by journalists for corruption, and suing the journalist if these facts be false (instead of beating them up or killing them).  Who are you talking about?

And how are the beaten/killed journalists "not innocent"?  Facts, please?

Shadow you are just piling up nonsense, I don't understand a single sentence of yours.

Of course you are not wanting to understand what I wrote. It would greatly confuse Americans.

So to be clear:
- Journalists are in many cases not angels who selfishly work for a better world. At least they need to make money which in case of an editor means to sell their papers. Scandals sell, regardless of the subject.
- Officials are also in many cases not clean, meaning they can be targetted.
- The number of officials however that has to power to order beatings and killings of journalists is extremely limited.
- Especially if you know that the 'governing body' of the FSB does not look kindly upon such mistakes which are bound to get international exposure.
- This means that in many cases which are claimed to be political, other motives may be present.
- Journalists can write about other things as politicians and ruin people who do not have  money and power like officials.
- Those other people might be considered innocent victims of the ever lasting hunger of journalists for scandals.
- If victimized, some people may be willing to correct the wrong done by journalists.
- Should a journalist have recently written about an official, the international community will immediately point to this as being the cause, regardless of reality.

To summarize, its simple to point at a politician every time a journalist is killed ot beaten. However if a direct relation is proven, the journalists can sue the politicians, just as politicians incriminated unfairly can sue the journaists.

[Faux Pas]

Actually no, it is not as confusing as you might want to think to us "Americans". Quite explicit I think. Your only sense of loyalty, honor and duty is motivated by your inherent greed so, everyone else's must be too.

Of course you are not wanting to understand what I wrote. It would greatly confuse Americans.

So to be clear:
- Journalists are in many cases not angels who selfishly work for a better world. At least they need to make money which in case of an editor means to sell their papers. Scandals sell, regardless of the subject.
- Officials are also in many cases not clean, meaning they can be targetted.

Scandals and wrong doing is, scandal and wrong doing. They are not in some way cleansed because the perpetrator's wrong doing were reported by a journalist. Professional journalist do live and work by a code of ethics. A concept apparently completely oblivious to you. If public officials committed the wrong doing or the crime, they have earned their position of shame and deserved to reported on. The public has a right to know what their officials do with the public coffers. If you can't take that heat, don't take on the position of a public official.

- The number of officials however that has to power to order beatings and killings of journalists is extremely limited.
- Especially if you know that the 'governing body' of the FSB does not look kindly upon such mistakes which are bound to get international exposure.

Bullsnip. You are apparently attempting to speak from a perch of authority here and it is extremely clear you don't know dic. Beatings as well as murders and other intimidation happen with regularity by the lowest ranking militisa right on up to the Kremlin, White House or Parliament. When it goes unchecked as it apparently does quite often in Russia, the populace becomes submissive to it. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

- This means that in many cases which are claimed to be political, other motives may be present.
- Journalists can write about other things as politicians and ruin people who do not have  money and power like officials.
- Those other people might be considered innocent victims of the ever lasting hunger of journalists for scandals.
- If victimized, some people may be willing to correct the wrong done by journalists.
- Should a journalist have recently written about an official, the international community will immediately point to this as being the cause, regardless of reality.

To summarize, its simple to point at a politician every time a journalist is killed ot beaten. However if a direct relation is proven, the journalists can sue the politicians, just as politicians incriminated unfairly can sue the journaists.

Other motives can ALWAYS be present. All journalist are not perfect but, your attempt to white-wash crimes committed by seats of authority is somehow the fault of the dead or maimed journalist is really "way the hell out there" and absurd on it's face. You speak out of both sides of your mouth Shadow and they do not agree. Victimized by journalist so they are just in correcting the wrong done by journalist? Then your next sentence that they can "sue" each other? In whose court?  Let's just silence all journalist everywhere and they will be no problems.

[groovlstk]

Of course you are not wanting to understand what I wrote. It would greatly confuse Americans.

And pretty much anyone else who knows anything about the role of the press, excluding the uneducated and readers of tabloids.

So to be clear:
- Journalists are in many cases not angels who selfishly work for a better world. At least they need to make money which in case of an editor means to sell their papers. Scandals sell, regardless of the subject.

This statement is intellectually dishonest and cynical, but I think you know that already

[Shadow]

Actually no, it is not as confusing as you might want to think to us "Americans". Quite explicit I think. Your only sense of loyalty, honor and duty is motivated by your inherent greed so, everyone else's must be too.

I see you believe others think like yourself. This by itself means you are already confused.

Scandals and wrong doing is, scandal and wrong doing. They are not in some way cleansed because the perpetrator's wrong doing were reported by a journalist. Professional journalist do live and work by a code of ethics. A concept apparently completely oblivious to you. If public officials committed the wrong doing or the crime, they have earned their position of shame and deserved to reported on. The public has a right to know what their officials do with the public coffers. If you can't take that heat, don't take on the position of a public official.

Unfortunately there are very little professional journalists in the world, and the number of them living in the FSU is relatively minimal. Of course in the eyes of some people only state officials and police can be corrupt.

Bullsnip. You are apparently attempting to speak from a perch of authority here and it is extremely clear you don't know dic. Beatings as well as murders and other intimidation happen with regularity by the lowest ranking militisa right on up to the Kremlin, White House or Parliament. When it goes unchecked as it apparently does quite often in Russia, the populace becomes submissive to it. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Please enlighten me with examples from your superior authority, hopefully not examples from wikipedia.

Other motives can ALWAYS be present. All journalist are not perfect but, your attempt to white-wash crimes committed by seats of authority is somehow the fault of the dead or maimed journalist is really "way the hell out there" and absurd on it's face. You speak out of both sides of your mouth Shadow and they do not agree. Victimized by journalist so they are just in correcting the wrong done by journalist? Then your next sentence that they can "sue" each other? In whose court?  Let's just silence all journalist everywhere and they will be no problems.

I do not attempt to white-wash crimes. However I do not sit on the chair of judge, jury and executioner when reading a third-hand or sixth-hand story. If there is proof, anyone can go to court, especially journalists who were beaten. Or is this suddenly the priviledge of officials wrongly accused ? I just took your own statement and reversed it. Confusing ? Probably.

[Shadow]

This statement is intellectually dishonest and cynical, but I think you know that already

Cynical yes, as far as intellectual dishonesty is concerned, I leave that part to journalists.

[Faux Pas]

I see you believe others think like yourself. This by itself means you are already confused.

I don't kid myself that anyone thinks as I do. How anyone else "thinks" is of no consequence to me. If there is a confused one here as to the role of a free press in any society, that would be you.

Unfortunately there are very little professional journalists in the world, and the number of them living in the FSU is relatively minimal. Of course in the eyes of some people only state officials and police can be corrupt.

Are you completely out of your mind? There are literally a million plus professional journalists in the world. A great many of them are in Russia where incidentally, it is much more difficult to be a journalist. Being a journalist under such conditions requires much more professionalism, sense of ethics, honor and loyalty to their respective communities. These people are heroes and you project them as criminals while exonerating the real criminals.

Please enlighten me with examples from your superior authority, hopefully not examples from wikipedia.

I won't do your work for you but, I'll will clue you in, there is currently over 200 cases in Russia alone at this moment. People and more specifically governments do, what they are capable and strong enough to do. It is not the responsibility of the press or the journalist to stop them, only to inform you. I have a position of superior authority on this subject of which, I will not justify to the likes of you. Doing so would only dishonor everyone in the profession.

I do not attempt to white-wash crimes. However I do not sit on the chair of judge, jury and executioner when reading a third-hand or sixth-hand story. If there is proof, anyone can go to court, especially journalists who were beaten. Or is this suddenly the priviledge of officials wrongly accused ? I just took your own statement and reversed it. Confusing ? Probably.

You've done nothing but white wash these unpunished and for the most part uninvestigated crimes. You blame the journalist for their own beatings and deaths when their only crime is reporting their findings to the populace. Something in your profound ignorance you still fail to understand, it is not up to the journalist to take anyone to court. You haven't reversed anything nor have you confused me. Your head in the sand along with your Gestapo logic blinds you from seeing or knowing any truth.