Russian "troll factory" flooding the internet with propaganda [Archive] - Debate Policy

Little-Acorn

05-29-2015, 12:07 PM

It's hard to tell when any story is real, or made up and deliberately spread for propaganda purposes.

Have we seen any evidence of this?

Are there any posters here who have shown up recently, saying they are from Russia, supporting the Putin regime, saying Ukraine really wants to join Russia (despite the need for tanks, bombs, and killings to make them do it), calling the Ukraine government "Nazis", etc?

---------------------------------------------

http://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/russian-troll-factory-flooding-internet-with-propaganda-1.2396874

Russian 'troll factory' flooding Internet with propaganda

Iuliia Subbotovska, The Associated Press
Published Friday, May 29, 2015 7:16AM EDT
Last Updated Friday, May 29, 2015 8:21AM EDT

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia -- Deep inside a four-story marble building in St. Petersburg, hundreds of workers tap away at computers on the front lines of an information war, say those who have been inside. Known as "Kremlin trolls," the men and women work 12-hour shifts around the clock, flooding the Internet with propaganda aimed at stamping President Vladimir Putin's world vision on Russia, and the world.

The Kremlin has always dabbled in propaganda, but in the past year its troll campaign has gone into overdrive, adding hundreds of online operatives to help counter Western pressure over its role in the pro-Russian insurgency in eastern Ukraine. The program is drawing Serbia away from its proclaimed EU membership path and closer to the Russian orbit, and is targeting Germany, the United States and other Western powers. The operation has worried the European Union enough to prompt it to draw up a blueprint for fighting Russia's disinformation campaign, although details have not yet been released.

Lyuda Savchuk, a single mother with two children, worked in the St. Petersburg "troll factory" until mid-March. The 34-year-old journalist said she had some idea of the Orwellian universe she was entering when she took the job, but underestimated its intensity and scope.

"I knew it was something bad, but of course I never suspected that it was this horrible and this large-scale," she said in an interview in her apartment, which has colorful drawings on the walls for her two preschool-age children.

She described how the trolls manage several social media accounts under different nicknames, such as koka-kola23, green--margo and Funornotfun. Those in her department had to bash out 160 blog posts during a 12-hour shift. Trolls in other departments flooded the Internet with doctored images and pro-Putin commentary on news stories that crop up on Russian and Western news portals.

In some departments, she said, the trolls receive daily talking points on what to write and what emotions to evoke. "It seems to me that they don't know what they are doing," Savchuk said. "They simply repeat what they are told."

http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2396877.1432898101!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_620/image.jpg
'Troll factory' in Russia
A woman enters the four-story building known as the 'troll factory' in St. Petersburg, Russia, Sunday, April 19, 2015. (AP / Dmitry Lovetsky)

revelarts

05-29-2015, 12:19 PM

that's a Great Job. I wish i could do that.
not the propaganda part, just get paid for being on the internet all day.

Balu

05-29-2015, 01:05 PM

Gunny

05-29-2015, 01:27 PM

I followed the link. In is a very funny article. Especially this: "...St. Petersburg journalist Andrei Soshnikov, who was one of the first to report on the "troll factory," said about 400 people work in the building. A video he posted on YouTube this spring gave a rare glimpse inside the building; in one room trolls were shown sitting shoulder-to-shoulder at their computers...." http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/good.gif
It really can compete with the words of White House Communications Director (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Communications_Director) who previously served as a spokesperson for the United States Department of State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_State), Jennifer Rene "Jen" Psaki : that if it is necessary the 6-th American Fleet comes to the coast of Belorussia. (see the world map) http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

White House Communications Director: Obama stooge. He thinks there are 57 United States. So he wants to take the Fleet to a land-locked country. No surprise there.:laugh:

aboutime

05-29-2015, 01:33 PM

red state

05-29-2015, 04:14 PM

White House Communications Director: Obama stooge. He thinks there are 57 United States. So he wants to take the Fleet to a land-locked country. No surprise there.:laugh:

Correction.....that's 58 States. But, YEAH, the left really is that much of a stooge.

Polite Russian

05-29-2015, 04:36 PM

If you want to, guys, I can check that building. I live in Saint Petersburg.
:DDD

Balu

05-29-2015, 05:24 PM

White House Communications Director: Obama stooge. He thinks there are 57 United States. So he wants to take the Fleet to a land-locked country. No surprise there.:laugh:
I am even afraid to tell about your previous President George Bush (Jr), brought up in a family of the Director of CIA, President of the USA, a graduate of Yale University, who confused Austria with Australia, Slovakia with Slovenia an addressed to British Queen as Elizabeth the Eleventh.
It looks like a system. Doesn't it?

Little-Acorn

05-29-2015, 06:45 PM

If you want to, guys, I can check that building. I live in Saint Petersburg.
:DDD

Good idea. I'm sure the Russian authorities would be pleased to tell one of their subjects exactly what really goes on in that building.

(snicker)

Little-Acorn

05-29-2015, 06:46 PM

Balu

05-29-2015, 07:37 PM

Wow. Mr. Balu sure tried to change the subject in a hurry, didn't he?
Why? I am not raising ANOTHER subject to discuss. I just draw the attention to the fact, that you authorities at the highest level are rather ignorant persons and this is a kind of a system. I have no intention to discuss why you continuously vote for such. This is non of my business/ It is yours. I am electing my President in my country. And I am pleased to know that the rating of our "Dictator" in the USA is higher than that of President Obama.http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

aboutime

05-29-2015, 08:12 PM

tailfins

05-29-2015, 09:33 PM

that's a Great Job. I wish i could do that.
not the propaganda part, just get paid for being on the internet all day.

Maybe Ron Jeremy can hook you up.

Drummond

05-29-2015, 10:02 PM

Why? I am not raising ANOTHER subject to discuss. I just draw the attention to the fact, that you authorities at the highest level are rather ignorant persons and this is a kind of a system. I have no intention to discuss why you continuously vote for such. This is non of my business/ It is yours. I am electing my President in my country. And I am pleased to know that the rating of our "Dictator" in the USA is higher than that of President Obama.http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif
And how did you feel about anti-Putin protesting ?

Did you even know about it ?

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/06/world/europe/russia-election/

Police arrested at least 250 protesters and an opposition leader in Russia's capital Tuesday in a second day of demonstrations against parliamentary election results.
Protesters decried what they described as electoral fraud in Sunday's national vote, which kept Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's party in power but significantly decreased the number of seats it holds in parliament.

Boris Nemtsov, a former deputy prime minister turned vocal government opponent, told CNN he was among those detained at a rally.

Putin's United Russia party held a separate demonstration. Police said there were about 8,000 people there.

Tuesday's anti-Putin protests drew much smaller crowds than a similar rally in Moscow Monday, where thousands of demonstrators turned out for an event state news agency RIA Novosti described as the largest opposition demonstration in years. Protesters who turned out Tuesday were met with a firm response from security forces, who dispersed many and made arrests.

But some analysts said the presence of protesters was a significant sign that could prove a turning point in Russian politics.

"This isn't a surprise that the party got fewer votes. I think the real surprise are the number of people who went out on the street," said Toby Gati, a senior international adviser at the Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld firm.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

05-29-2015, 10:12 PM

that's a Great Job. I wish i could do that.
not the propaganda part, just get paid for being on the internet all day.

Quote Originally Posted by John V View Post
Drummond, part of my job involves spotting nit-pickers, baiters and those with such a poor level of knowledge that they latch on to other posters but never put their own ideas out for others to see. The Telegraph is media, now if that, google and Wiki is where you get your info from it makes a poor showing. I have you down as a typical product of a UK leftie liberal, integrating yourself with the mainstream because you are unable to articulate anything yourself. I’m not critical of America, I’m critical of every country, its politicians and their policies – it’s what I do for a living.

Now, I’ll tell you what will impress me. Away you go and write a short 1000 word essay on any aspect of the political or social topic of your choice. Post it, no google, no quotes, (we can usually spot plagiarism), in your own words and using your own explanations. Now go away and impress me, I’ll give you an honest opinion and if I was wrong about you, I’ll admit it.
Drummond, part of my job involves spotting nit-pickers, baiters and those with such a poor level of knowledge that they latch on to other posters but never put their own ideas out for others to see.
^^^^ Care to tell us how doing that is part of your job teaching foreign students about social science?-Tyr

part of my job involves spotting nit-pickers, baiters and those with such a poor level of knowledge

Really--you do that in a classroom of foreign students??-Tyr

that they latch on to other posters
^^^^ So the students you teach are doing that?--Tyr

I think you may have stepped in it and not kept your story straight about what you said you do. -Tyr

Quote Originally Posted by John V View Post
Drummond, part of my job involves spotting nit-pickers, baiters and those with such a poor level of knowledge that they latch on to other posters but never put their own ideas out for others to see.

Could be , seems like a job description for doing that posted above.. hmmmmmmm...

other posters!!!! Sure seems to be internet to me.. I thought he taught foreign kids social science in school..hmmmmm -Tyr

red state

05-29-2015, 10:26 PM

Wow. Mr. Balu sure tried to change the subject in a hurry, didn't he?

Yeah....reminds me of a few liberals I have the displeasure of knowing.

Balu

05-29-2015, 10:49 PM

Right you are Balu. You certainly can't help it if during the last election, when PUTIN won. He managed to get 100% of the votes counted? Here in the U.S.A. we call that something else, and it rhymes with DICTATORSHIP.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin received 63.64% of the vote with almost 100% of the votes counted.[4][5] With this election, Putin secured a record third term in the

Sorry to ask - Are you an immigrant that you didn't understand what you have read?
The picture is as follows (pay attention to a number of candidates and parties participated in these DIRECT elections, were EVERY voice of ANY individual is respected.)

http://i69.fastpic.ru/big/2015/0530/f0/98ddc4e5b5d57c46bf3aaf9eb9f725f0.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_presidential_election,_2012

P.S.
I am not sure that in 2012 there were the LAST elections were Putin won. They were the LATEST.

Balu

05-29-2015, 11:17 PM

And how did you feel about anti-Putin protesting ?

Did you even know about it ?

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/12/06/world/europe/russia-election/

Can you tell me the reasons why and for how long THESE persons were arrested? What was their punishment (if any) and for what? Then we'll be able to speak objectively.

tailfins

05-29-2015, 11:26 PM

Can you tell me the reasons why and for how long THESE persons were arrested? What was their punishment (if any) and for what? Then we'll be able to speak objectively.

Putin may be lesser of evils. Who would ever vote for a Communist? Controlling the media and having a vote only gives the ILLUSION of representative government.

Kathianne

05-29-2015, 11:27 PM

Can you tell me the reasons why and for how long THESE persons were arrested? What was their punishment (if any) and for what? Then we'll be able to speak objectively.

Well we could discuss, if you'd fill us in on the facts that you seem to have at your disposal. Then we can speak to each other.

Balu

05-30-2015, 12:05 AM

Putin may be lesser of evils. Who would ever vote for a Communist?(1) Controlling the media and having a vote only gives the ILLUSION of representative government (2).
1. During presidential elections I voted for Putin, and during parliamentary elections - for communists. And I can tell the reasons. I didn't want United Russia Party to have a majority, as I don't like some things in Regulation of the Parliament according which some important Laws are voted by a simple, but not qualified majority and Communists can provide a reasonable balance.
2. You are overestimating the roll of mass media for Russian electorate. Our Soviet past gives us a good vaccination. So we have rather critical attitude to all sorts of populism and political show bla-bla. We (in majority) like to judge by the competence and results.
I see the question of President Putin interests you. Today (Moscow time) I shall open a thread on this subject. Hope it will be interesting.

Drummond

05-30-2015, 01:32 AM

Can you tell me the reasons why and for how long THESE persons were arrested? What was their punishment (if any) and for what? Then we'll be able to speak objectively.

Does this mean that the answer to my second question is 'NO' ?

I think you're making my point for me. Can't YOU tell ME ?

Did the Russian media avoid coverage of the story ?

Drummond

05-30-2015, 01:39 AM

1. During presidential elections I voted for Putin, and during parliamentary elections - for communists. And I can tell the reasons. I didn't want United Russia Party to have a majority, as I don't like some things in Regulation of the Parliament according which some important Laws are voted by a simple, but not qualified majority and Communists can provide a reasonable balance.
2. You are overestimating the roll of mass media for Russian electorate. Our Soviet past gives us a good vaccination. So we have rather critical attitude to all sorts of populism and political show bla-bla. We (in majority) like to judge by the competence and results.
I see the question of President Putin interests you. Today (Moscow time) I shall open a thread on this subject. Hope it will be interesting.

Do you really not equate support for the Communists as a return to days when your population was ruled by a repressive dictatorship, one seeking to turn its citizens into raw material for the State ?

Do you really not think that individuals have individual worth ?

And how do you think the West would view a returning Communist regime ? Don't you think a return to the old Cold War days is something you risk by having the mentality which maintained one, governing you again ?

Balu

05-30-2015, 02:15 AM

Does this mean that the answer to my second question is 'NO' ?

I think you're making my point for me. Can't YOU tell ME ?

Did the Russian media avoid coverage of the story ?
Why? We had the reports of this demonstrations on our TV programs. We are aware of then. And the reasons to arrests are only violation of police demands to keep order and pre-agreed plan of demonstration. The demonstrations a legal in our country, but they must be pre-agreed with local authorities, not paralyze the city live. All the slogans and appeals to the illegal actions are stopped by police and the persons involved are transmitted to the police station for identificationю You call it arrested. According to our legislation a person may be detained not more than for 3 hours without charge.

Balu

05-30-2015, 02:22 AM

Do you really not equate support for the Communists as a return to days when your population was ruled by a repressive dictatorship, one seeking to turn its citizens into raw material for the State ?

Do you really not think that individuals have individual worth ?

And how do you think the West would view a returning Communist regime ? Don't you think a return to the old Cold War days is something you risk by having the mentality which maintained one, governing you again ?
Why we should care how YOU would view ANYTHING? Who are you to lecture us how and what we do? I would suggest you to remember the fate of Procrustes for your own benefit. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/dirol.gif

Drummond

05-30-2015, 02:32 AM

Why? We had the reports of this demonstrations on our TV programs. We are aware of then. And the reasons to arrests are only violation of police demands to keep order and pre-agreed plan of demonstration. The demonstrations a legal in our country, but they must be pre-agreed with local authorities, not paralyze the city live. All the slogans and appeals to the illegal actions are stopped by police and the persons involved are transmitted to the police station for identificationю You call it arrested. According to our legislation a person may be detained not more than for 3 hours without charge.

Not more than THREE HOURS ?? I find that incredible.

Don't your police believe in amassing evidence, to help ensure that miscarriages of justice don't come about ?

If your police really don't need more than three hours, if they retain confidence that they can make charges stick across the broad spectrum of crimes, that suggests to me undue deference to the police and the perceived 'rightness' of their actions. Evidence of a Police State in action ?

And do you treat terrorism differently ?

See (for UK law) -

http://www.lawmentor.co.uk/blog/2011/01/22/terror-detention-period-now-14-days/

New broom, Damian Green of the Home Office, has announced that the present government has decided, as part of its recent review of terrorist measures, to reduce the 28-day detention period to 14 days. Some of you may remember that the previous labour government were reduced to leaving their measure to increase the detention to 42 days on the table in a bid to save its legislative programme at the time. The measure to increase the maximum period to 42 days received opposition from civil liberties groups.

Now we are told that the 28 day period, far from being increased, is being reduced to 14 days. The provision operates as part of the Terrorist Act 2006. The new period will apply from the 25 January 2011.

Balu

05-30-2015, 02:38 AM

Not more than THREE HOURS ?? I find that incredible.

Don't your police believe in amassing evidence, to help ensure that miscarriages of justice don't come about ?

If your police really don't need more than three hours, that suggests to me undue deference to the police. Evidence of a Police State in action ?

And do you treat terrorism differently ?

See (for UK law) -

http://www.lawmentor.co.uk/blog/2011/01/22/terror-detention-period-now-14-days/
You'd better ask Polite Russian. He is a policeman and and these questions are in his professional competence.

Polite Russian

05-30-2015, 03:49 AM

Not more than THREE HOURS ?? I find that incredible.

Don't your police believe in amassing evidence, to help ensure that miscarriages of justice don't come about ?

If your police really don't need more than three hours, if they retain confidence that they can make charges stick across the broad spectrum of crimes, that suggests to me undue deference to the police and the perceived 'rightness' of their actions. Evidence of a Police State in action ?

And do you treat terrorism differently ?

See (for UK law) -

http://www.lawmentor.co.uk/blog/2011/01/22/terror-detention-period-now-14-days/

If if you don't mind I can try to answer.

If you violate the police (not serious, just unarned resistance, if it do not harm policeman hard) - it's not a crime, but an offence (administrative offence, in our laws). Mostly. And we do not arrest them. This called administrative detention. This 3 hours need for identification of a person. Than the administrative investigation may continue without an offender. At that stage police work with evidence and classification of the offence. At the end of investigation the case goes to the court, where juge make a solution.
It is a procedure, if citizen commit an offence, not a crime. The sanction for such action is usually administrative arrest (15 days) or/and a fine.

we got a big problems with terrorism.. There are big problem with illegal armed organizations, which are Islamic radicals in northern Caucasus (republic of Dagestan, for example). They attack our police stations, military bases. Many our policeman and soldiers was murdered there. And they usually do not surrender. So usually they find their end.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1eb5rK-YSfA
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qTYFSBuRjyk

and can you explain pls, what do you mean by "evidence of a police state in action?" What do you want to know? Sorry for my illiteracy :(

I hope you get your answer :3
hope you do not need links to our laws? I don't know, if there are english version of them.

tailfins

05-30-2015, 09:14 AM

Why we should care how YOU would view ANYTHING? Who are you to lecture us how and what we do? I would suggest you to remember the fate of Procrustes for your own benefit. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/dirol.gif

In today's world of multi-national corporations it indeed does matter. If the team you work on has contingents in let's say, Dallas, Kiev, Bangalore, Shenzhen, Sao Paulo, etc., you had better know what motivated people in those places as well as their approach to work. Brits, for example are sticklers for adherence to rules, Indians and Brazilians are obedient to authority, Japanese quickly notice defects. Americans tend to not call something "done" until additional effort doesn't yield an improvement. One way to ruin morale on an American team for leaders to demand "pushing the product out the door" while there's significant improvements waiting to be made. An American or British opinion is useful because it will reveal solutions to problems your habits don't naturally think of.

NightTrain

05-30-2015, 09:19 AM

we got a big problems with terrorism.. There are big problem with illegal armed organizations, which are Islamic radicals in northern Caucasus (republic of Dagestan, for example). They attack our police stations, military bases. Many our policeman and soldiers was murdered there. And they usually do not surrender. So usually they find their end.

Strangely enough, the only terrorist attack in Russia that I can think of was the one on the theater with the hostages. There are almost zero reports of terrorist attacks that I've see in the news happening in Russia.

I don't know if that's because of suppressed reporting from within Russia about such things, but I always attributed that to a story I remember hearing about back in the '80s :

The crisis began Sept. 30, 1985, when four attaches from the Soviet Embassy were kidnapped in Beirut by Muslim extremists. Western news agencies received individual photos of the four men that same night, each with an automatic pistol pressed against his head.

The photos were accompanied by a note from a hitherto unknown group calling itself the Islamic Liberation Organization. The message warned that the four Soviet captives would be executed, one by one, unless Moscow pressured pro- Syrian militiamen to cease shelling positions held by the pro-Iranian fundamentalist militia in Lebanon's northern port city of Tripoli.

Although the Soviets attempted to open some channel for negotiations with the kidnappers, there was no immediate let-up in the shelling at Tripoli.

Only two days after the kidnappings, the body of one of the four kidnapped men, a 30-year-old consular secretary named Arkady Katov, was found, shot through the head, on a Beirut trash dump.

Apparently, that's when the Soviets dropped the idea of sweet talk and turned the matter over to the KGB.

The KGB determined the kidnapping to be the work of the Shiite Muslim group known as Hezbollah, or Party of God. This was the same radical pro-Iranian faction that figured so belligerently in the mass hostage-taking from the TWA airliner at Beirut Airport last June.

Unlike the approach the United States used to resolve the TWA crisis, however, the Soviets did not bother negotiating with Hezbollah through Nabih Berri, Lebanon's justice minister and leader of the Shiite Amal militia.

Instead, the KGB kidnapped a man they knew to be a close relative of a prominent Hezbollah leader. They then castrated him and sent the severed organs to the Hezbollah official, before dispatching the unfortunate kinsman with a bullet in the brain.

In addition to presenting him with this grisly proof of their seriousness, the KGB operatives also advised the Hezbollah leader that they knew the indentities of other close relatives of his, and that he could expect more such packages if the three Soviet diplomats were not freed immediately.

The three remaining hostages were freed on foot only 150 yards from the Soviet Embassy.

http://articles.philly.com/1986-01-15/news/26052630_1_hostage-crisis-soviet-captives-islamic-liberation-organization

There's no way to know if that story is true, of course. But I think it's an amusing possibility as to why the Soviets never were fucked with by terrorists... the KGB were a bunch of ruthless commies that knew how to respond to the terrorism game - but more importantly, they didn't care about anyone's opinion as to how they responded.

Gunny

05-30-2015, 09:25 AM

Strangely enough, the only terrorist attack in Russia that I can think of was the one on the theater with the hostages. There aren't hardly any reports of terrorist attacks that I've see in the news happening in Russia.

I don't know if that's because of suppressed reporting from within Russia about such things, but I always attributed that to a story I remember hearing about back in the '80s :

http://articles.philly.com/1986-01-15/news/26052630_1_hostage-crisis-soviet-captives-islamic-liberation-organization

There's no way to know if that story is true, of course. But I think it's an amusing possibility as to why the Soviets never were fucked with by terrorists... the KGB were a bunch of ruthless commies that knew how to respond to the terrorism game - but more importantly, they didn't care about anyone's opinion as to how they responded.

Speaking of amusing .....:laugh:

Alleging this "troll factory" is real, boy did they ever pick the wrong board. :laugh:

Kathianne

05-30-2015, 09:27 AM

Russia incorporates areas rife with Islamic extremists and has had attacks for years:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/annaborshchevskaya/2014/11/30/russias-ongoing-battle-with-radical-islam/

Russia's Ongoing Battle With Radical Islam

Last month, Russia’s Anti-Terrorism Committee met in Moscow and announced (http://nac.gov.ru/nakmessage/2014/10/14/v-moskve-proshlo-zasedanie-natsionalnogo-antiterroristicheskogo-komiteta.htmlhttp:/nac.gov.ru/nakmessage/2014/10/14/v-moskve-proshlo-zasedanie-natsionalnogo-antiterroristicheskogo-komiteta.html) that terrorist acts in the country have declined more than two-fold in 2014 as compared the same time period of the previous year.

There are many reasons to remain skeptical, however. Russia is hardly winning its broader battle with terrorism and radical Islam.

According to the latest Institute for Economics and Peace Global Terrorism Index report (http://www.visionofhumanity.org/sites/default/files/Global%20Terrorism%20Index%20Report%202014.pdf) released this month, Russia ranked 11th out of 162 countries, behind only countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. Russia’s latest score shows little change since 2003, when the Global Terrorism Index first came out. In fact, since 2003, Russia has steadfastly remained (http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#page/indexes/terrorism-index/2013/RUS/OVER)within the top ten to 12 countries in the world most affected by terrorism, according to the index.

...
In March 2011, Doku Umarov, a Chechen militant and the self-proclaimed Emir of the Caucasus Emirate, a militant jihadist organization operating in Russia,announced (http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/summer2013/tatarstan-battle-islam-russias-heartland) in an online video his intention to expand the Caucasus Emirate’s operations from the North Caucasus deeper into Russia. He specifically called on Muslims in Tatarstan to rise against Moscow.

The next year saw the rise (http://www.rferl.org/content/tatarstan-attack-spar-fears-that-islamist-threat-is-spreading/24650674.html)of radical Islamist activity in Tatarstan, which included two attacks on the region’s most prominent Muslim clerics. Last month, Tatarstan’s authorities have reportedly (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/russia-london-based-islamic-sect-hizb-ut-tahrirs-150138776.html#krcoESM) arrested eight Hizb ut-Tahrir members on terrorism charges, including recruitment of Muslims.

Russia’s battle with radical Islam has its roots in the secular separatist Chechen movement of the 1990s which increasingly grew more radical and spread to other regions over the years, in part due to Russia’s own policies. Indeed, in April 2013, the Economist noted (http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2013/04/russian-politics-0), “Over the past decade, the more moderate, secular figures in the original Chechen resistance were purposefully ignored by Moscow and pushed aside by more extremist fighters. Today’s conflict is a grinding civil war fuelled in equal parts by the more violent strains of Salafi Islam and a toxic cycle of never-ending revenge killing.”

Until the Russian government addresses the fundamental causes behind rise of radical Islam in Russia, and adapts its strategies accordingly, there’s little reason to think the situation will show significant improvement.

Polite Russian

05-30-2015, 10:10 AM

Strangely enough, the only terrorist attack in Russia that I can think of was the one on the theater with the hostages. There are almost zero reports of terrorist attacks that I've see in the news happening in Russia.

I don't know if that's because of suppressed reporting from within Russia about such things, but I always attributed that to a story I remember hearing about back in the '80s :

http://articles.philly.com/1986-01-15/news/26052630_1_hostage-crisis-soviet-captives-islamic-liberation-organization

There's no way to know if that story is true, of course. But I think it's an amusing possibility as to why the Soviets never were fucked with by terrorists... the KGB were a bunch of ruthless commies that knew how to respond to the terrorism game - but more importantly, they didn't care about anyone's opinion as to how they responded.

Okay. I will not name every terract, ecause there are a lot of them, but here some of them, the most famos in Russia

1995:
- city Budennovsk, 195 terrorists (Leader - Shamil Basaev) take 1600 hostages in the hospital.
1996:
- city Kizlar, group of terrorists (Leader - Salman Raduev) take over 2000 hostages.
2002:
- Moscow, theater Nord-Ost. Group of 41 terrorists capture a lot of hostages. (interview with FCS (Federal Security Service) officer)
2004:
- Beslan. Group of terrorists captured hostages (a lot of children, it was the 1 of september, first day when school start to work) in the school. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnrwwJZr8SM - about 10 Alpha officers, who died there)
2014:
- Volgograd city, explosion at the train station.

Here is the list. I think, that it is not full enough. (It is on russian, but just look at the list. You need the section Российская Федерация)
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D 1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0 %B0%D0%BA%D1%82%D1%8B,_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1 %80%D1%88%D1%91%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0 %A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8#.D0.A0.D0.BE.D1. 81.D1.81.D0.B8.D0.B9.D1.81.D0.BA.D0.B0.D1.8F_.D0.A 4.D0.B5.D0.B4.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.86.D0.B8.D1.8F

And that Boston terrorists also lived in Chechen, (or Dagestan, I do not remember. This republics are close to each other anyway) republic.

NightTrain

05-30-2015, 10:39 AM

Speaking of amusing .....:laugh:

Alleging this "troll factory" is real, boy did they ever pick the wrong board. :laugh:

I don't buy the 'Troll Factory' story. It smacks of conspiracy theory nutjob shenanigans.

The muzzies on Al-Jazeera also claim there's a vast Jew conspiracy of paid commenters to discredit the lunacy espoused by muzzie posters. I was startled to learn that I am actually a highly trained Mossad agent, a Zionist, and a Jew, and that I live in Israel. The other popular theory was that I was a Pakistani Jew (but still a Mossad agent!) because I referred to them all as 'muzzies'. (???) It was very funny watching the idiots come up with the next bizarre idea as to who I am - and this all happened after I responded to a British guy that I'm an American and a Christian after he asked.

Gunny

05-30-2015, 10:53 AM

NightTrain

05-30-2015, 11:31 AM

I am even afraid to tell about your previous President George Bush (Jr), brought up in a family of the Director of CIA, President of the USA, a graduate of Yale University, who confused Austria with Australia, Slovakia with Slovenia an addressed to British Queen as Elizabeth the Eleventh.
It looks like a system. Doesn't it?

While I can appreciate making comments designed to enrage us, your efforts are largely wasted.

Your comment a while ago regarding CNN broadcasting palm trees in Moscow was funny, and didn't raise any eyebrows. I don't think you'll find one person on this board that regards CNN as a reliable news organization. In truth, they're a joke and a sham. MSNBC is even worse.

Your multiple comments regarding Obama or any of his officials certainly draw no blood. Obama is a complete buffoon and there is nothing insulting you could possibly say about him or his administration that we haven't discussed even more negatively.

George W. Bush was a great President who got handed 9/11 by another incompetent Democrat, namely Bill Clinton who was more interested in getting blowjobs by White House interns than chasing down terrorists. That being said, your efforts to piss any of us off with comments about Bush are woefully inadequate. The liberals in this country have said far worse than anything you could possibly come up with - and I guarantee that.

I think you are unaware of the Great American Tradition of making fun of our politicians. We roast them unmercifully, and they usually deserve it - some much more than others.

Just wanted to point out that you're spinning your wheels with that whole angle by trying to get a rise out of this group of Americans with those subjects.

Gunny

05-30-2015, 11:41 AM

While I can appreciate making comments designed to enrage us, your efforts are largely wasted.

Your comment a while ago regarding CNN broadcasting palm trees in Moscow was funny, and didn't raise any eyebrows. I don't think you'll find one person on this board that regards CNN as a reliable news organization. In truth, they're a joke and a sham. MSNBC is even worse.

Your multiple comments regarding Obama or any of his officials certainly draw no blood. Obama is a complete buffoon and there is nothing insulting you could possibly say about him or his administration that we haven't discussed even more negatively.

George W. Bush was a great President who got handed 9/11 by another incompetent Democrat, namely Bill Clinton who was more interested in getting blowjobs by White House interns than chasing down terrorists. That being said, your efforts to piss any of us off with comments about Bush are woefully inadequate. The liberals in this country have said far worse than anything you could possibly come up with - and I guarantee that.

I think you are unaware of the Great American Tradition of making fun of our politicians. We roast them unmercifully, and they usually deserve it - some much more than others.

Just wanted to point out that you're spinning your wheels with that whole angle by trying to get a rise out of this group of Americans with those subjects.

You mean like when Putin punked out Obama we were all laughing? :laugh: Notice he never tried any of that crap when Bush was in office. He'd have taken an ass-whoopin'. It's kind of like handing water wings to a life guard.

I've had privates that were better leaders than Obama.

Balu

05-30-2015, 12:53 PM

While I can appreciate making comments designed to enrage us, your efforts are largely wasted.

Your comment a while ago regarding CNN broadcasting palm trees in Moscow was funny, and didn't raise any eyebrows. I don't think you'll find one person on this board that regards CNN as a reliable news organization. In truth, they're a joke and a sham. MSNBC is even worse.

Your multiple comments regarding Obama or any of his officials certainly draw no blood. Obama is a complete buffoon and there is nothing insulting you could possibly say about him or his administration that we haven't discussed even more negatively.

George W. Bush was a great President who got handed 9/11 by another incompetent Democrat, namely Bill Clinton who was more interested in getting blowjobs by White House interns than chasing down terrorists. That being said, your efforts to piss any of us off with comments about Bush are woefully inadequate. The liberals in this country have said far worse than anything you could possibly come up with - and I guarantee that.

I think you are unaware of the Great American Tradition of making fun of our politicians. We roast them unmercifully, and they usually deserve it - some much more than others.

Just wanted to point out that you're spinning your wheels with that whole angle by trying to get a rise out of this group of Americans with those subjects.
Nice! And were else, thus, you are able to form your opinion from, but not from your mass media, to judge?
Why? I know. But I see no sense to elect those whom you will laugh at.

Gunny

05-30-2015, 12:58 PM

Nice! And were else, thus, you are able to form your opinion from, but not from your mass media, to judge?
Why? I know. But I see no sense to elect those whom you will laugh at.

When you get around to getting back on topic. feel free to let us know.

I see no sense in electing an asshat that wants to control you and and everyone around you. Why do you think we hate Obama? He's a piece of shit who thinks he's above the rules and thinks he's a king.

So does Putin.

Balu

05-30-2015, 01:09 PM

George W. Bush was a great President who got handed 9/11 by another incompetent Democrat, namely Bill Clinton who was more interested in getting blowjobs .

9/11 is a very interesting case. I've already asked, how TWO Boeings could ruin THREE high-rises by a method of industrial building destruction?
Now I would ask you about Pentagon case. Do you really believe that jet engine blades could burn into ash and thus nobody could find them?
Do you really believe that a passenger jet can fly at about 400 mph at ground altitude?! Ask any pilot (in Alaska aviation is very common) and, sure, he'll tell you many interesting things.

NightTrain

05-30-2015, 02:13 PM

Nice! And were else, thus, you are able to form your opinion from, but not from your mass media, to judge?

Simple. Corroboration and a little research.

I've learned to be skeptical of news stories and if there's any doubt, I'll spend a couple of minutes verifying it for myself. And I'll always qualify my statements right up front if I'm unsure - I don't like getting caught with my pants down. Certain news organizations are engaged in blatant political bias and shamelessly run with it. When something is reported by MSNBC or CNN, the first thing I will do after reading it is cross-checking the author, the source(s) and other news organizations reporting it.

Remember I told you how journalists will happily cut each other's throats to break a story? The competition for fame and fortune is fierce and they all want it badly. Bob Woodward is still famous after breaking the Nixon Watergate scandal over 40 years ago. There will be no successful conspiracy to cover up anything major, because as soon as a rival news network smells a story, they'll blast the story along with giving the offending reporters / editors a massive, career-killing black eye and will be shunned by everyone that knew them. Pretty much everyone involved professionally with the disgraced conspirator(s) is stunned by how fast their peers abandon and condemn them.

Take a quick look at what happened to Dan Rather and Brian Williams - they were media giants and untouchable until they got caught doing stupid things. Rival news outfits made sure they were absolutely destroyed in legendary fashion.

I'll give you an example that happened about 2 months ago with a story that Al Jazeera ran. Gaza got flooded with water, and Al Jazeera blasted headlines around the world about how Israel opened local dams to flood and destroy those kitten-loving Palestinians. Israel denied it, and AJ started running quotes of Israeli officials who were "blatantly lying" - all confirmed from reliable sources from Hamas and the PLO, along with teary-eyed personal accounts from Achmed the falafel vendor who almost drowned.

It sounded really fake to me, so I started checking, along with other people who actually think. No one else was reporting on it except local palestinians and AJ. Finally, someone pulled up a map of Google Earth and proved that there aren't any dams anywhere around that area.

The cause? Rain. Yeah, rain. AJ quietly retracted the story and they looked like the fools that they are, but they still jump on any story that's anti-Israel or anti-American with glee without any regard for the truth - and that's why they have no credibility. Al Jazeera is owned by the royal family of Qatar, so since they are State-Owned they don't have to compete with professional news agencies and really the only motivation they have by doing it is prestige in the Arab world - it damned sure isn't truthful reporting. State-run news organizations are notoriously deceptive and are nothing more than propaganda vehicles for the government that owns them. See where I'm going with this?

Do a test for yourself sometime and reference an Al Jazeera article in one of your arguments. You won't like the laughs and immediate dismissal it'll get.

Blogs are always highly suspect. That's because there's no real culpability for what they present as fact, other than the site's reputation, if any. Sometimes they get it right and are ahead of the pack with 100% accuracy, but the track record shows the vast majority re-reporting an event rather than breaking the story. Most are someone giving their own ideas and spin on events.

I certainly wouldn't trust Putin and Lavrov to tell me what happened, that would be foolhardy to say the least.

But here's a fun fact for you : I would take Putin's word for something over Obama's word. If both men were standing in front of me and gave me information contradicting each other, I'd take Putin's word - and I'm relatively sure that Putin would lie to me if it suited him. And that's no joke, I mean that. Sad, isn't it?

Why? I know. But I see no sense to elect those whom you will laugh at.

I couldn't agree with you more.

We've all discussed here the mystery as to how the idiot got elected, and the only answer is that there are a LOT of very stupid people in America. The fact that it happened twice truly is a disgrace.

NightTrain

05-30-2015, 02:58 PM

9/11 is a very interesting case. I've already asked, how TWO Boeings could ruin THREE high-rises by a method of industrial building destruction?
Now I would ask you about Pentagon case. Do you really believe that jet engine blades could burn into ash and thus nobody could find them?
Do you really believe that a passenger jet can fly at about 400 mph at ground altitude?! Ask any pilot (in Alaska aviation is very common) and, sure, he'll tell you many interesting things.

I took Commercial Aviation at University of Alaska, Anchorage and I spend a great deal of time in both airplanes and helicopters for my job that takes me all over Alaska. I know a couple of things about aviation.

The whole 9/11 conspiracy theory has been hashed and rehashed ad nauseam and I'm not going to discuss it with you.

I'll be brutally blunt with you : whoever told you that 9/11 was an inside job has his head up his ass. There's video of it happening by many different Americans, both professional reporters and ordinary citizens and it is impossible with over 3,000 casualties that it was covered up.

It always strikes me as weird that an otherwise intelligent guy would believe in such obvious nonsense.

Like Forrest Gump so wisely stated, that's all I have to say about that.

tailfins

05-30-2015, 03:50 PM

Nice! And were else, thus, you are able to form your opinion from, but not from your mass media, to judge?
Why? I know. But I see no sense to elect those whom you will laugh at.

We have an alternative media. If you want to get up to speed, try listening to the program referenced below:

http://www.marklevinshow.com/common/page.php?pt=podcasts&id=191&is_corp=0

aboutime

05-30-2015, 04:07 PM

9/11 is a very interesting case. I've already asked, how TWO Boeings could ruin THREE high-rises by a method of industrial building destruction?
Now I would ask you about Pentagon case. Do you really believe that jet engine blades could burn into ash and thus nobody could find them?
Do you really believe that a passenger jet can fly at about 400 mph at ground altitude?! Ask any pilot (in Alaska aviation is very common) and, sure, he'll tell you many interesting things.

Balu. There are THOUSANDS of conspiracy theory junkies like you on YOUTUBE, and the rest of the INTERNET. Bet you are one who is convinced Hollywood Televised the Landing on the Moon in July of 1969 too????

As for your literal ignorance...demonstrated above. Doesn't really matter what YOU think we believe. When you witness something IN PERSON, it's very difficult to convince your OWN EYES, EARS, and BODY...it didn't happen.

NOTE to Balu. SEE HOW WELL THE PUTIN PROPAGANDA MACHINE WORKS FOR YOU?

tailfins

05-30-2015, 04:34 PM

Balu. There are THOUSANDS of conspiracy theory junkies like you on YOUTUBE, and the rest of the INTERNET. Bet you are one who is convinced Hollywood Televised the Landing on the Moon in July of 1969 too????

As for your literal ignorance...demonstrated above. Doesn't really matter what YOU think we believe. When you witness something IN PERSON, it's very difficult to convince your OWN EYES, EARS, and BODY...it didn't happen.

NOTE to Balu. SEE HOW WELL THE PUTIN PROPAGANDA MACHINE WORKS FOR YOU?

I see how you found out about the moon landing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f_DPrSEOEo

aboutime

05-30-2015, 04:37 PM

I see how you found out about the moon landing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f_DPrSEOEo

Which begs the question. "Which 'D' are you?"

Balu

05-30-2015, 08:53 PM

I'll be brutally blunt with you : whoever told you that 9/11 was an inside job has his head up his ass. There's video of it happening by many different Americans, both professional reporters and ordinary citizens and it is impossible with over 3,000 casualties that it was covered up.

Ostrich behavior, when a person starts ignoring facts doesn't change anything. But there is a risk that a floor under the feet may be no sand but concrete.
As to me I also do not believe into firing rate of Lee Harvey Oswald accused in murdering John F Kennedy and his ability to fire from different angles simultaneously and in his casual murdering and in casual deaths of of many witnesses in a row.
And I remember that Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill let the bombardment of Coventry for reasons of expediency. So, comparing with this the twin buildings crash may be a childish prank.

tailfins

05-30-2015, 09:42 PM

Ostrich behavior, when a person starts ignoring facts doesn't change anything. But there is a risk that a floor under the feet may be no sand but concrete.
As to me I also do not believe into firing rate of Lee Harvey Oswald accused in murdering John F Kennedy and his ability to fire from different angles simultaneously and in his casual murdering and in casual deaths of of many witnesses in a row.
And I remember that Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill let the bombardment of Coventry for reasons of expediency. So, comparing with this the twin buildings crash may be a childish prank.

If you're looking for a "conspiracy", here's a reasonable one: The environmentalists prevented the use of certain materials such as asbestos. The World Trade Center was weak because of "green" construction and collapsed when stressed.

Balu

05-30-2015, 09:56 PM

If you're looking for a "conspiracy", here's a reasonable one: The environmentalists prevented the use of certain materials such as asbestos. The World Trade Center was weak because of "green" construction and collapsed when stressed.
But these very buildings were designed to resist penetration of the aircraft. Their construction had to endure. The temperature of burning jet fuel is not able to melt the building frame or weaken it evenly. In ANY case these buildings should have been inclined like Pizza Tower before their destruction.

Drummond

05-31-2015, 08:05 AM

If if you don't mind I can try to answer.

If you violate the police (not serious, just unarned resistance, if it do not harm policeman hard) - it's not a crime, but an offence (administrative offence, in our laws). Mostly. And we do not arrest them. This called administrative detention. This 3 hours need for identification of a person. Than the administrative investigation may continue without an offender. At that stage police work with evidence and classification of the offence. At the end of investigation the case goes to the court, where juge make a solution.
It is a procedure, if citizen commit an offence, not a crime. The sanction for such action is usually administrative arrest (15 days) or/and a fine.

we got a big problems with terrorism.. There are big problem with illegal armed organizations, which are Islamic radicals in northern Caucasus (republic of Dagestan, for example). They attack our police stations, military bases. Many our policeman and soldiers was murdered there. And they usually do not surrender. So usually they find their end.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1eb5rK-YSfA
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qTYFSBuRjyk

and can you explain pls, what do you mean by "evidence of a police state in action?" What do you want to know? Sorry for my illiteracy :(

I hope you get your answer :3
hope you do not need links to our laws? I don't know, if there are english version of them.

I've been absent since Friday, and I'm only quickly skimming the threads this afternoon before returning later this evening for a more detailed study.

But my quick reply here, now, is to suspect a degree of misunderstanding, maybe on my part (if need be, I'll consider this some more).

The 'three hours' came across to me as a situation in which Russian police arrest suspects, then only have three hours after the initial arrest before they must charge the suspect with a crime. That didn't make a lot of sense, since surely, police forces have to know they have a high probability of getting a successful prosecution, otherwise, why do they bother with arrests in the first place ??

This in turn means that they need a high quality of evidence to manage that. But .. only THREE HOURS to get it ? Seemed impractical. Police go to a crime scene, obtain witness statements, examine an area for forensic evidence, collect it, test it, tabulate it all ... and somehow, all managed in THREE hours ?

Not practical ... surely ?

YET .. your police must manage their prosecutions, nonetheless.

The only way this made sense to me was if there was a near-universal massive bias in your courts towards police actions and authority. How could the police successfully operate otherwise, with such a poor chance of gathering watertight evidence in so short a time ?

Anyway ... I need to log off for now. But I drafted this to you to explain my comments and thinking. I shall return for a longer period later this evening.

Drummond

05-31-2015, 08:12 AM

But these very buildings were designed to resist penetration of the aircraft. Their construction had to endure. The temperature of burning jet fuel is not able to melt the building frame or weaken it evenly. In ANY case these buildings should have been inclined like Pizza Tower before their destruction.

'Sorry', but I'm not buying any of this.

The thing about conspiracy theories is that they only tend to surface a very long time after the initial event. Why ? Because memories and perceptions need to dim, controversy has to have time to mount, before any halfway 'decent' conspiracy theory can have a chance at traction.

This is what we have here, I think.

The areas of doubt you profess to have, Balu, would surely have been considered, if there was anything TO consider, long ago.

Jeff

05-31-2015, 08:21 AM

But these very buildings were designed to resist penetration of the aircraft. Their construction had to endure. The temperature of burning jet fuel is not able to melt the building frame or weaken it evenly. In ANY case these buildings should have been inclined like Pizza Tower before their destruction.

Balu, have you ever seen a tractor trailer burn ? I have seen them burn so bad that all that is left of the metal truck is a frame and a engine, I also seen a wreck that caused a fuel tanker to explode under a bridge, the I beams that run from side to side under the bridge disintegrated from the heat. Now lets not forget that this wasn't jet fuel I am talking about, it was gas ( I believe ) Jet fuel burns much hotter. And lets not forget that in those towers the heat was confined, it burned inside and the heat was so bad it melted the metal structure, not like a tractor trailer accident where as the heat can rise away from the accident.

Balu

05-31-2015, 08:54 AM

Balu, have you ever seen a tractor trailer burn ? I have seen them burn so bad that all that is left of the metal truck is a frame and a engine, I also seen a wreck that caused a fuel tanker to explode under a bridge, the I beams that run from side to side under the bridge disintegrated from the heat. Now lets not forget that this wasn't jet fuel I am talking about, it was gas ( I believe ) Jet fuel burns much hotter. And lets not forget that in those towers the heat was confined, it burned inside and the heat was so bad it melted the metal structure, not like a tractor trailer accident where as the heat can rise away from the accident.

"...On Saturday, March 5th, 2005 I called Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM late-night radio talk-radio program - at least 50 times. I got through to Art once, at approximately 1:45 am. God must have intervened because it's very difficult to get Art on the phone nowadays, especially when the theme of his show is going to be debunking 9-11 conspiracies. In addition to calling Art on the telephone, I also fast-blasted him numerous times and sent him several regular emails with questions for Ben Chertoff, research editor of Popular Mechanics. I had quite a few talking points I wanted Art's guest to address - like this one:

Explain the pools of molten steel burning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 9-11. Since we know the jet fuel burnt off within a couple of minutes and jet fuel fires cannot even come close to the temperatures it takes to create a molten or liquid state in steel, then how do you explain this? This is addressed at length in 9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn. FEMA's report even stated that the WTC fires burned at, or below temperatures in a typical office fire. So, if we know that hydrocarbon fires can only reach a maximum temperature of 1517 degrees Fahrenheit, how could they possibly have melted this steel, when the melting point of steel is 2,795 degrees and the boiling point of steel (when it becomes a molten liquid) is 5,182 degrees Fahrenheit. ..."

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/312837.shtml

Jeff

05-31-2015, 09:02 AM

"...On Saturday, March 5th, 2005 I called Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM late-night radio talk-radio program - at least 50 times. I got through to Art once, at approximately 1:45 am. God must have intervened because it's very difficult to get Art on the phone nowadays, especially when the theme of his show is going to be debunking 9-11 conspiracies. In addition to calling Art on the telephone, I also fast-blasted him numerous times and sent him several regular emails with questions for Ben Chertoff, research editor of Popular Mechanics. I had quite a few talking points I wanted Art's guest to address - like this one:

Explain the pools of molten steel burning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 9-11. Since we know the jet fuel burnt off within a couple of minutes and jet fuel fires cannot even come close to the temperatures it takes to create a molten or liquid state in steel, then how do you explain this? This is addressed at length in 9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn. FEMA's report even stated that the WTC fires burned at, or below temperatures in a typical office fire. So, if we know that hydrocarbon fires can only reach a maximum temperature of 1517 degrees Fahrenheit, how could they possibly have melted this steel, when the melting point of steel is 2,795 degrees and the boiling point of steel (when it becomes a molten liquid) is 5,182 degrees Fahrenheit. ..."

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/312837.shtml

Fire melted Steel, AGAIN! WHERES ROSIE AT THIS TIME?

The gasoline tanker that exploded burned much much cooler than jet fuel burns, yet, it had the heat to burn through a high grade steel that was used to hold up an overpass. How can people still say that 9/11 was an inside job and still say that "FIRE CANT BURN STEEL" when once again, IT HAS! Where's all the Rosie FANATICS at ? How long will it be until Rosie goes on air and says something to try and save face?

Like I said I personally seen what burning gasoline can do to metal I beams holding up a bridge, it melted them, jet fuel burns hotter.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AwrC0CajE2tViwsA7hVPmolQ;_ylu=X3oDMTBya 2tiZ2YyBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwM1BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?qid=20070430122500AAGTP4G

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

05-31-2015, 09:09 AM

"...On Saturday, March 5th, 2005 I called Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM late-night radio talk-radio program - at least 50 times. I got through to Art once, at approximately 1:45 am. God must have intervened because it's very difficult to get Art on the phone nowadays, especially when the theme of his show is going to be debunking 9-11 conspiracies. In addition to calling Art on the telephone, I also fast-blasted him numerous times and sent him several regular emails with questions for Ben Chertoff, research editor of Popular Mechanics. I had quite a few talking points I wanted Art's guest to address - like this one:

Explain the pools of molten steel burning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 9-11. Since we know the jet fuel burnt off within a couple of minutes and jet fuel fires cannot even come close to the temperatures it takes to create a molten or liquid state in steel, then how do you explain this? This is addressed at length in 9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn. FEMA's report even stated that the WTC fires burned at, or below temperatures in a typical office fire. So, if we know that hydrocarbon fires can only reach a maximum temperature of 1517 degrees Fahrenheit, how could they possibly have melted this steel, when the melting point of steel is 2,795 degrees and the boiling point of steel (when it becomes a molten liquid) is 5,182 degrees Fahrenheit. ..."

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/312837.shtml

If you think any metal once heat and melted stays in molten form a hundred days after the source of heat is gone you are daffy my friend.
No metal that I know of stays in molten or semi-liquid form if a heat source is not there to keep it in that existing state.

Also note this:
Metals lose about 50% of their strength at 60% of their melting temperature.-Tyr

Jeff

05-31-2015, 09:16 AM

I remember the Skyway in Jersey city NJ caught fire, yup it had structural damage, it burned from years of dumping garbage under the bridge, the trash caught fire and actually melted the structure which was way above the fire, the bridge was closed for months.

Max R.

05-31-2015, 09:25 AM

I don't buy the 'Troll Factory' story. It smacks of conspiracy theory nutjob shenanigans.

The muzzies on Al-Jazeera also claim there's a vast Jew conspiracy of paid commenters to discredit the lunacy espoused by muzzie posters. I was startled to learn that I am actually a highly trained Mossad agent, a Zionist, and a Jew, and that I live in Israel. The other popular theory was that I was a Pakistani Jew (but still a Mossad agent!) because I referred to them all as 'muzzies'. (???) It was very funny watching the idiots come up with the next bizarre idea as to who I am - and this all happened after I responded to a British guy that I'm an American and a Christian after he asked.
While I don't buy "conspiracy theory nutjob shenanigans" either, propaganda tools are important to most political organizations. The "troll house" may, indeed, exist, but what would be their target(s)? Texas? I doubt it. Not too many Texans are going to think Putin's a nice guy and a defender of respectable ideals like truth, justice and the American way. Putin is a f**king a**hole.

A more likely target of such an operation is his own people, Ukrainians (in order to break their will to fight or to get them to agree to breaking the country in half) and Europeans. Many Europeans are split between appeasing a dictator and having their houses warmed at night with Russian oil.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

05-31-2015, 09:30 AM

While I don't buy "conspiracy theory nutjob shenanigans" either, propaganda tools are important to most political organizations. The "troll house" may, indeed, exist, but what would be their target(s)? Texas? I doubt it. Not too many Texans are going to think Putin's a nice guy and a defender of respectable ideals like truth, justice and the American way. Putin is a f**king a**hole.

A more likely target of such an operation is his own people, Ukrainians (in order to break their will to fight or to get them to agree to breaking the country in half) and Europeans. Many Europeans are split between appeasing a dictator and having their houses warmed at night with Russian oil.

Russians and Chinese are masters at the use of propaganda--they have to be with such enslaved populations to control 24/7 365 days a year decade after decade. I suspect that the troll house exists too.
Even a young, new upstart like ISIS have already set up propaganda sites and entities to spread their message and to counter the truth. -Tyr

Kathianne

05-31-2015, 09:34 AM

While I don't buy "conspiracy theory nutjob shenanigans" either, propaganda tools are important to most political organizations. The "troll house" may, indeed, exist, but what would be their target(s)? Texas? I doubt it. Not too many Texans are going to think Putin's a nice guy and a defender of respectable ideals like truth, justice and the American way. Putin is a f**king a**hole.

A more likely target of such an operation is his own people, Ukrainians (in order to break their will to fight or to get them to agree to breaking the country in half) and Europeans. Many Europeans are split between appeasing a dictator and having their houses warmed at night with Russian oil.

Perhaps. Then again, while we acknowledge often our lack of understanding of other cultures, we tend to not apply that to others. A case in point maybe is Balu's many posts here. Is this a forum that has 'great influence?' Most here do not seem overly involved in their communities or in politics. A very small forum, somewhat dominated by a certain political leaning, interested in certain topics and political leaders.

While informed in the main of current events, this forum doesn't have members that are open to what he's pushing. As I see it, he's wasting his time if he hopes to influence American thinking. There are many sites where some would be open to the 'inevitable failing' of America, indeed would embrace his sales pitch. This just isn't one of them.

Balu

05-31-2015, 09:40 AM

[QUOTE]]

If you think any metal once heat and melted stays in molten form a hundred days after the source of heat is gone you are daffy my friend.
No metal that I know of stays in molten or semi-liquid form if a heat source is not there to keep it in that existing state.

Also note this:
Metals lose about 50% of their strength at 60% of their melting temperature.-Tyr
Once I happed to work with Cooper Heat company, engaged in contraction oil and gas refinery columns. To achieve the uniform temperature they used burners to avoid the effect of leaning Tower of Pisa. The temperature on different sides of buildings was not uniform, so they should have bend before collapse, without demonstrating a pure method of industrial building destruction.

Max R.

05-31-2015, 09:47 AM

Perhaps. Then again, while we acknowledge often our lack of understanding of other cultures, we tend to not apply that to others. A case in point maybe is Balu's many posts here. Is this a forum that has 'great influence?' Most here do not seem overly involved in their communities or in politics. A very small forum, somewhat dominated by a certain political leaning, interested in certain topics and political leaders.

While informed in the main of current events, this forum doesn't have members that are open to what he's pushing. As I see it, he's wasting his time if he hopes to influence American thinking. There are many sites where some would be open to the 'inevitable failing' of America, indeed would embrace his sales pitch. This just isn't one of them.

Agreed. Heck, we can't even influence each other much in politics. I doubt very many Republicans and Democrats on this forum are going to switch sides based on the information they've seen on a political forum. Since most voters aren't even on such forums, the overall effect is nil. Not much bang-for-the-buck there.

OTOH, what I have seen in my time on such forums is an increased number of people I suspect have mental issues. Either there are more conspiracy theorist and schizo-paranoiacs online or they're very, very good at masking themselves at work.

I'm inclined to believe the former. Before the popularity of the Internet, such people could be seen ranting in parks or carrying "The End is Near" signs but those actions sometimes put them in physical danger from rotten fruit or even rocks. Posting such bizarre ideas from behind their keyboard is much safer.

Balu

05-31-2015, 09:49 AM

As I see it, he's wasting his time if he hopes to influence American thinking. There are many sites where some would be open to the 'inevitable failing' of America, indeed would embrace his sales pitch. This just isn't one of them.
I am rather adequate not to set unrealistic tasks. I am not able by definition to compete with your propaganda machine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

Max R.

05-31-2015, 09:49 AM

Russians and Chinese are masters at the use of propaganda--they have to be with such enslaved populations to control 24/7 365 days a year decade after decade. I suspect that the troll house exists too.
Even a young, new upstart like ISIS have already set up propaganda sites and entities to spread their message and to counter the truth. -Tyr
Agreed, but again, look at the targets of such propaganda; it's for their own people.

Look at the core audiences of Fox News and MSNBC. Is either one playing to the opposition or are they just playing to their own believers?

If the Russia Troll House exists, and I see no reason why it wouldn't, then it exists to spread BS to Russians, not Americans. Same for ISIS, their propaganda is for their own followers, not loyal Americans.

Gunny

05-31-2015, 09:56 AM

Gunny

05-31-2015, 10:00 AM

I took Commercial Aviation at University of Alaska, Anchorage and I spend a great deal of time in both airplanes and helicopters for my job that takes me all over Alaska. I know a couple of things about aviation.

The whole 9/11 conspiracy theory has been hashed and rehashed ad nauseam and I'm not going to discuss it with you.

I'll be brutally blunt with you : whoever told you that 9/11 was an inside job has his head up his ass. There's video of it happening by many different Americans, both professional reporters and ordinary citizens and it is impossible with over 3,000 casualties that it was covered up.

It always strikes me as weird that an otherwise intelligent guy would believe in such obvious nonsense.

Like Forrest Gump so wisely stated, that's all I have to say about that.

My take: The number of people it would take to make 9/11 an inside job is ridiculous. And if there's one thing we all know about Americans, someone would have spilled the beans by now either for a reduced sentence or a book.

Gunny

05-31-2015, 10:12 AM

I see how you found out about the moon landing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f_DPrSEOEo

My favorite one is JFK. Any Marine who COULDN'T make that shot spends a lot of time on mess duty and the rest of his time handing out towels at the gym. 90 yards. Yippee-ki-yi-yay. I'd take that shot with a Browning Hi-Power out of the box.

Gunny

05-31-2015, 10:16 AM

Ostrich behavior, when a person starts ignoring facts doesn't change anything. But there is a risk that a floor under the feet may be no sand but concrete.
As to me I also do not believe into firing rate of Lee Harvey Oswald accused in murdering John F Kennedy and his ability to fire from different angles simultaneously and in his casual murdering and in casual deaths of of many witnesses in a row.
And I remember that Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill let the bombardment of Coventry for reasons of expediency. So, comparing with this the twin buildings crash may be a childish prank.

Uh no. He fired from one angle and it has been scientifically proven. When you run your test on a stock model car that wasn't modified like JFK's, you can dream up all you want. There was no "magic bullet". It did exactly what it was supposed to. When you add in the jump seat that was lowered down to the right that Connally was sitting in -- straight shot. And I could nail you with a slingshot at 90 yards. Give me a bolt action rifle? I'd kill myself out of shame if I missed.

Gunny

05-31-2015, 10:21 AM

"...On Saturday, March 5th, 2005 I called Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM late-night radio talk-radio program - at least 50 times. I got through to Art once, at approximately 1:45 am. God must have intervened because it's very difficult to get Art on the phone nowadays, especially when the theme of his show is going to be debunking 9-11 conspiracies. In addition to calling Art on the telephone, I also fast-blasted him numerous times and sent him several regular emails with questions for Ben Chertoff, research editor of Popular Mechanics. I had quite a few talking points I wanted Art's guest to address - like this one:

Explain the pools of molten steel burning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 9-11. Since we know the jet fuel burnt off within a couple of minutes and jet fuel fires cannot even come close to the temperatures it takes to create a molten or liquid state in steel, then how do you explain this? This is addressed at length in 9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn. FEMA's report even stated that the WTC fires burned at, or below temperatures in a typical office fire. So, if we know that hydrocarbon fires can only reach a maximum temperature of 1517 degrees Fahrenheit, how could they possibly have melted this steel, when the melting point of steel is 2,795 degrees and the boiling point of steel (when it becomes a molten liquid) is 5,182 degrees Fahrenheit. ..."

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/03/312837.shtml\

Art Bell, huh? I'll tell you what ... let's get some JP-5 and test your theory. YOU get to wear it. I've seen that shit trash the entire hangar deck of an LHD.

As seems to be typical for you, you're out of your league. Ask Max. He's a Marine aviator. That crap will ignite if you look at it the wrong way and flashpoint isn't no 1517 degrees.

Gunny

05-31-2015, 10:33 AM

Perhaps. Then again, while we acknowledge often our lack of understanding of other cultures, we tend to not apply that to others. A case in point maybe is Balu's many posts here. Is this a forum that has 'great influence?' Most here do not seem overly involved in their communities or in politics. A very small forum, somewhat dominated by a certain political leaning, interested in certain topics and political leaders.

While informed in the main of current events, this forum doesn't have members that are open to what he's pushing. As I see it, he's wasting his time if he hopes to influence American thinking. There are many sites where some would be open to the 'inevitable failing' of America, indeed would embrace his sales pitch. This just isn't one of them.

I disagree. As much as people like to fool themselves otherwise, there are no forums open to debate that I am aware of. Anyone who has a different agenda than the status quo is immediately a target. Sometimes, rightfully so. One has to deal with the bias of the owner/staff, and whatever "gang" runs rampant on the board. Disclaimer: I'm not pointing fingers. Just a generalization of political message boards.

When one aspires to post nothing but pure propaganda, then one deserves getting hammered.

Gunny

05-31-2015, 10:35 AM

I am rather adequate not to set unrealistic tasks. I am not able by definition to compete with your propaganda machine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

Reverse that and look in the mirror.

tailfins

05-31-2015, 12:04 PM

I am rather adequate not to set unrealistic tasks. I am not able by definition to compete with your propaganda machine. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/smile3.gif

I welcome your different perspective. All I ask is that you return the favor.

Polite Russian

05-31-2015, 02:08 PM

I've been absent since Friday, and I'm only quickly skimming the threads this afternoon before returning later this evening for a more detailed study.

But my quick reply here, now, is to suspect a degree of misunderstanding, maybe on my part (if need be, I'll consider this some more).

The 'three hours' came across to me as a situation in which Russian police arrest suspects, then only have three hours after the initial arrest before they must charge the suspect with a crime. That didn't make a lot of sense, since surely, police forces have to know they have a high probability of getting a successful prosecution, otherwise, why do they bother with arrests in the first place ??

This in turn means that they need a high quality of evidence to manage that. But .. only THREE HOURS to get it ? Seemed impractical. Police go to a crime scene, obtain witness statements, examine an area for forensic evidence, collect it, test it, tabulate it all ... and somehow, all managed in THREE hours ?

Not practical ... surely ?

YET .. your police must manage their prosecutions, nonetheless.

The only way this made sense to me was if there was a near-universal massive bias in your courts towards police actions and authority. How could the police successfully operate otherwise, with such a poor chance of gathering watertight evidence in so short a time ?

Anyway ... I need to log off for now. But I drafted this to you to explain my comments and thinking. I shall return for a longer period later this evening.

Aaaaah! DAmn it. I think I understand you, but I dont know, how to explain :(

Here is some text, from our Codex of Criminal Process (google translate)

Article 91. Grounds for arrest of the suspect

1. The inquiry body, the investigator, the investigator shall have the right to detain a person on suspicion of committing a crime for which can be punished by imprisonment, if one of the following reasons:
1) When a person is caught committing a crime or immediately after its commission;
2) when victims or witnesses point out the person committed the crime;
3) when that person or his clothes, with him or in his home will be found clear evidence of a crime.
2. If there are other data giving grounds to suspect a person of committing a crime, it may be delayed if the person was trying to escape or does not have a permanent residence or is not established his identity, or if the investigator with the consent of the head of the investigative body or the investigator with the consent of the prosecutor in the court directed the petition against the election of the said person a preventive measure in the form of detention.

Article 92. Procedure for detention of a suspect

1. After a suspect is brought in the body of inquiry or an investigator within a period not more than 3 hours should be drawn up of detention in which a notation that the suspect explained the rights provided for in Article 46 of this Code.
2. The minutes shall indicate the date and time of the protocol, date, time, location, grounds and reasons for the detention of the suspect, the results of his personal search and other circumstances of his detention. The detention report signed by the person, its composition, and the suspect.
3. On the detention inquiry body, the investigator or the investigator is obliged to inform the prosecutor in writing within 12 hours after the arrest of the suspect.
4. The suspect shall be interrogated in accordance with the second part of Article 46, Articles 189 and 190 of this Code. Prior to the questioning of the suspect at his request, he provided meeting with a lawyer in private and in confidence. If necessary, the production of proceedings involving the suspected duration of the visits of more than 2 hours may be limited by the investigator with the obligatory prior notification of the suspect and his defense counsel. In any case the duration of visits may be less than 2 hours.

You also can look here http://base.garant.ru/12125178/12/#block_11512/ (http://base.garant.ru/12125178/) , and here http://base.garant.ru/12125178/13/ , if your browser can automatically translate text. Sorry, but criminal process is not my specialisation. :(

Drummond

05-31-2015, 02:30 PM

Why we should care how YOU would view ANYTHING?

I find that to be remarkably arrogant.

OK, well ... consider this, then.

The world has seen what happened the last time such a regime existed. The USSR was an empire, built by just such a regime. Entire countries dominated by it, made to ideologically march in lockstep to Soviet Communist diktat. One country divided into two .. the part dominated by your Communist regime turned, effectively, into a prison camp.

Hungary, 1956. Czechoslovakia, 1968. Soviets considered that military force was in each case required to counter so much as the possibility of opposition to the Communist will.

Afghanistan, 1980. Afghanistan invaded, a puppet regime installed. The forerunners of Al Qaeda fought you. Thanks to years of such fighting, the organisation which later became a major terrorist threat became powerful, well funded, well armed.

Go back in time to 1962. Cuba .. the Cuban missile crisis. International tension ratcheted up to such a degree that we came within minutes of 'seeing' the world reduced to a radioactive slagheap, mankind rendered extinct. All life on this planet, ditto ...

So, YOU tell ME. Why would we in the West have reason to view a return to your Communist adventurism with trepidation ?

You ask why you should care how we view 'anything'. Well, what I describe is a pretty big 'anything' .. just the fate of the planet, and the people living on it !!

We all have to share this world, Balu. We have a right to have concerns as to where any return to Communist brutalities will lead. For you to be indifferent to the concerns described, where they may lead, is irresponsibly blinkered, because in being that way, your leaders may well one day drag us all into a repeating of history. A history in which we came VERY close to armaggeddon.

Who are you to lecture us how and what we do?

What is the basis for your objection ? If you have a 'right' to dominate entire Peoples against their will, we have the right to actually 'dare' to voice an opinion on it !!!

I would suggest you to remember the fate of Procrustes for your own benefit. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/dirol.gif

Care to explain that further ... in particular, the context you had in mind ?

Drummond

05-31-2015, 02:52 PM

I disagree. As much as people like to fool themselves otherwise, there are no forums open to debate that I am aware of. Anyone who has a different agenda than the status quo is immediately a target. Sometimes, rightfully so. One has to deal with the bias of the owner/staff, and whatever "gang" runs rampant on the board. Disclaimer: I'm not pointing fingers. Just a generalization of political message boards.

When one aspires to post nothing but pure propaganda, then one deserves getting hammered.

Agreed - my own experience verifies much of this (and I can hardly be alone in this !).

As an experiment, and for 'the fun of it', I once joined a British debating forum which I knew had some strong Left wing biases. Within two weeks, I - shall we say - 'came to the attention of Moderators there'. Within six weeks, I was booted off. In those six weeks, one such Moderator engaged me in a protracted PM exchange, to try and break down my arguments, while another PM'd a couple of threats.

Things got to a head when one of my posts was intercepted and immediately removed.

The 'PM debater' Moderator was called 'Marxist Nutter' (.. sort of says it all). Not content with being complicit in booting me off, he even followed me to another Right wing debating forum run in America, became a member of it, using his previous monicker ... and tried his luck on that forum. He briefly resurrected something of our disagreements on that American forum, in between pushing his Marxist ideology on to everyone else.

He stuck with it for about the same length of time as I was on his British site, before petulantly giving up. He's still a member there, but hasn't posted in years.

I was targeted 'big time', even followed to another forum on another part of the planet ! But the Right wing forum he joined, always allowed him far greater leeway than was ever granted to me, by him and his Leftie gang.

The Left hate free speech. It allows too great a latitude for departure from the propagandist norm. I've never found the Right to be as rigid, for obvious reasons.

After all, we're infinitely better than that.

Drummond

05-31-2015, 03:04 PM

Aaaaah! DAmn it. I think I understand you, but I dont know, how to explain :(

Here is some text, from our Codex of Criminal Process (google translate)

Article 91. Grounds for arrest of the suspect

1. The inquiry body, the investigator, the investigator shall have the right to detain a person on suspicion of committing a crime for which can be punished by imprisonment, if one of the following reasons:
1) When a person is caught committing a crime or immediately after its commission;
2) when victims or witnesses point out the person committed the crime;
3) when that person or his clothes, with him or in his home will be found clear evidence of a crime.
2. If there are other data giving grounds to suspect a person of committing a crime, it may be delayed if the person was trying to escape or does not have a permanent residence or is not established his identity, or if the investigator with the consent of the head of the investigative body or the investigator with the consent of the prosecutor in the court directed the petition against the election of the said person a preventive measure in the form of detention.

Article 92. Procedure for detention of a suspect

1. After a suspect is brought in the body of inquiry or an investigator within a period not more than 3 hours should be drawn up of detention in which a notation that the suspect explained the rights provided for in Article 46 of this Code.
2. The minutes shall indicate the date and time of the protocol, date, time, location, grounds and reasons for the detention of the suspect, the results of his personal search and other circumstances of his detention. The detention report signed by the person, its composition, and the suspect.
3. On the detention inquiry body, the investigator or the investigator is obliged to inform the prosecutor in writing within 12 hours after the arrest of the suspect.
4. The suspect shall be interrogated in accordance with the second part of Article 46, Articles 189 and 190 of this Code. Prior to the questioning of the suspect at his request, he provided meeting with a lawyer in private and in confidence. If necessary, the production of proceedings involving the suspected duration of the visits of more than 2 hours may be limited by the investigator with the obligatory prior notification of the suspect and his defense counsel. In any case the duration of visits may be less than 2 hours.

You also can look here http://base.garant.ru/12125178/12/#block_11512/ (http://base.garant.ru/12125178/) , and here http://base.garant.ru/12125178/13/ , if your browser can automatically translate text. Sorry, but criminal process is not my specialisation. :(

'Polite Russian', I appreciate your posting this. I think I discern from the translation that the three hour period is not as rigid a timeframe - considering other freedoms of procedural latutude - as I'd believed. Seems more is involved in this than I'd thought, rendering my judgment an overly hasty one.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

05-31-2015, 03:21 PM

Agreed - my own experience verifies much of this (and I can hardly be alone in this !).

As an experiment, and for 'the fun of it', I once joined a British debating forum which I knew had some strong Left wing biases. Within two weeks, I - shall we say - 'came to the attention of Moderators there'. Within six weeks, I was booted off. In those six weeks, one such Moderator engaged me in a protracted PM exchange, to try and break down my arguments, while another PM'd a couple of threats.

Things got to a head when one of my posts was intercepted and immediately removed.

The 'PM debater' Moderator was called 'Marxist Nutter' (.. sort of says it all). Not content with being complicit in booting me off, he even followed me to another Right wing debating forum run in America, became a member of it, using his previous monicker ... and tried his luck on that forum. He briefly resurrected something of our disagreements on that American forum, in between pushing his Marxist ideology on to everyone else.

He stuck with it for about the same length of time as I was on his British site, before petulantly giving up. He's still a member there, but hasn't posted in years.

I was targeted 'big time', even followed to another forum on another part of the planet ! But the Right wing forum he joined, always allowed him far greater leeway than was ever granted to me, by him and his Leftie gang.

The Left hate free speech. It allows too great a latitude for departure from the propagandist norm. I've never found the Right to be as rigid, for obvious reasons.

After all, we're infinitely better than that.

See, I knew you were a big-time troublemaker ... :poke: ;)--Tyr

Drummond

05-31-2015, 03:30 PM

See, I knew you were a big-time troublemaker ... :poke: ;)--Tyr:clap::clap::laugh2::laugh2:

Oh, you've known that for rather a long time, Tyr !

You found me on the American forum I was referring to, before introducing me to this one. I can't remember .. were you already a member of it when Marxist Nutter turned up, or did all this pre-date your arrival there ?

aboutime

05-31-2015, 04:35 PM

Sorry to ask - Are you an immigrant that you didn't understand what you have read?
The picture is as follows (pay attention to a number of candidates and parties participated in these DIRECT elections, were EVERY voice of ANY individual is respected.)

http://i69.fastpic.ru/big/2015/0530/f0/98ddc4e5b5d57c46bf3aaf9eb9f725f0.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_presidential_election,_2012

P.S.
I am not sure that in 2012 there were the LAST elections were Putin won. They were the LATEST.

Balu. It appears you should be asking such questions of yourself. Re-read what I said..the 63% number with 100% of the votes counted. Nothing different than what your cut/paste above/below says. I'm still mystified as to WHY you hesitate, and refuse to call Putin your Dictator-in-chief?
I know YOU and the Russian people do not have a FIRST AMENDMENT. No matter how much you feel a need to deny it. Would you show PUTIN this forum? Better yet. Would you dare show him this forum after Honestly answering the DICTATOR question?

Polite Russian

05-31-2015, 04:46 PM

'Polite Russian', I appreciate your posting this. I think I discern from the translation that the three hour period is not as rigid a timeframe - considering other freedoms of procedural latutude - as I'd believed. Seems more is involved in this than I'd thought, rendering my judgment an overly hasty one.

If you want to know somethink else - you are welcome. I'l try to answer with pleasure :)

Balu

06-01-2015, 07:24 AM

I'm still mystified as to WHY you hesitate, and refuse to call Putin your Dictator-in-chief?
I know YOU and the Russian people do not have a FIRST AMENDMENT. No matter how much you feel a need to deny it. Would you show PUTIN this forum? Better yet. Would you dare show him this forum after Honestly answering the DICTATOR question?
My HONEST answer is - I have no reason to consider him a Dictator. He was elected and acts in STRICT accordance with our Constitution. If somebody dislike it, it's possible. They may express their thoughts in accordance with our Legislation. Any violation of the Legislation must be discontinued in accordance of our State Laws.

An example.

Russian Opposition Protest: Thousands Gather At Unsanctioned Meeting Against Putin

“Respected citizens, this event is against Moscow laws, please walk to the Metro in order not to be detained,” repeated policemen -- who numbered in the hundreds -- over a megaphone throughout the meeting.
The crowd did not heed the call. ...

The police had to and acted correspondingly. I won't tell you how your police acts in similar situations. You know it better than I do.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/russian-opposition-protest-putin_n_2307317.html

http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm

(http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm)

aboutime

06-01-2015, 02:43 PM

My HONEST answer is - I have no reason to consider him a Dictator. He was elected and acts in STRICT accordance with our Constitution. If somebody dislike it, it's possible. They may express their thoughts in accordance with our Legislation. Any violation of the Legislation must be discontinued in accordance of our State Laws.

An example.

Russian Opposition Protest: Thousands Gather At Unsanctioned Meeting Against Putin

“Respected citizens, this event is against Moscow laws, please walk to the Metro in order not to be detained,” repeated policemen -- who numbered in the hundreds -- over a megaphone throughout the meeting.
The crowd did not heed the call. ...

The police had to and acted correspondingly. I won't tell you how your police acts in similar situations. You know it better than I do.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/russian-opposition-protest-putin_n_2307317.html

http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm

(http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm)

Very nice reading. But...I do believe you intentionally FORGOT to include the Unwritten Portion of those constitutional provisions...not mentioned..such us "Unless the KGB shall deem it so!"
I do not doubt you are as dedicated, and loyal to your Homeland as I am of America.
But, we also cannot forget. Everything isn't as the PARTY leaders would like us to believe.

This stands out for me: We have the right to assemble WITHOUT threats of being jailed here in the USA.

“Respected citizens, this event is against Moscow laws, please walk to the Metro in order not to be detained,” repeated policemen -- who numbered in the hundreds -- over a megaphone throughout the meeting.

The crowd did not heed the call.

Max R.

06-02-2015, 04:34 PM

9/11 is a very interesting case. I've already asked, how TWO Boeings could ruin THREE high-rises by a method of industrial building destruction?
Now I would ask you about Pentagon case. Do you really believe that jet engine blades could burn into ash and thus nobody could find them?
Do you really believe that a passenger jet can fly at about 400 mph at ground altitude?! Ask any pilot (in Alaska aviation is very common) and, sure, he'll tell you many interesting things.
I'm a pilot. F = MA

A Boeing 767-200ER weighs
181,610 lb. On 9/11, AA flight 11 had 92 people onboard. Using an average weight of 185 lbs, that's another 17,020 lbs. Add an average baggage weight of 50 lbs each and that's another 4600lbs. Max fuel load is 24,000+ gallons, but at the time of the crash it had ~10,000 gallons;another 67,000 lbs. All total, over 270,000 lbs. Accelerate that mass to 300mph and it equals over 16,424,688.6 m kg/s of force slamming into a building sideways.

You may be able to lift 300 lbs, but could you take 300 lbs moving at 30MPH slamming into your side? Would you remain upright or not?

Spin your conspiracy theories if you like since I doubt anything I have to say will matter to you, but the events of 9/11 are well documented and reviewed by thousands of experts in engineering, aeronautics and other applicable fields.