Voices from Russia

Saturday, 26 May 2018

26 May 2018. As Seen By Vitaly Podvitsky… You Shall Not Pass!


The Ukrainian leadership decided to block several media outlets, including RIA Novosti Ukraine and Sputnik, as part of Kiev’s anti-Russian sanctions. Per a new set of punitive measures against Russia, Kiev blocked access to россиясегодня.рф, Sputniknews.com, Ria.ru, Rsport.ria.ru, 1prime.ru, and realty.ria.ru for Ukrainian users. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed outrage over this move and described it as an “act of political censorship”. Earlier this month, the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) broke into the offices of RIA Novosti Ukraine in Kiev, arresting the agency’s head, Kirill Vyshinsky, on charges of treason.

24 May 2018

Sputnik International



Monday, 30 October 2017

Ajamu Baraka on Liberal Totalitarianism


You folks worry about the supposed neofascism of Trump while liberals give ammunition to the state to impose further thought control on the people through censoring social media… the only medium where capital doesn’t completely control content. However, that will change… thanks, liberal democrats and bourgeois leftists.

30 October 2017

Ajamu Baraka



I hate all forms of neoliberalism… both “liberal” and “conservative”. Both are feral and evil, but the “conservative” doesn’t mask their greed and cupidity. The “liberal” cloaks it with smarmy shibboleths and ghastly identity politics. True Conservatism distrusts Captial as much as we Leftists do. Liberals LOVE Capital… the “conservatives” are the most liberal “liberals”, for they hate Tradition and love Gain above all. Be careful… the people who gas the most about “freedom” are freedom’s greatest foes…


Saturday, 28 January 2017

MID sez Moscow has “Serious Concerns” Over RT Reporter’s Arrest Whilst Covering Anti-Trump Rally



On Friday, MID RF official spokesman M V Zakharova said that Moscow has serious concerns over the arrest of RT America’s Alexander Rubinstein at an anti-Trump protest. At a press briefing, she stated:

As for the situation with the RT correspondent, it causes serious concern. I’m referring to RT America’s correspondent Alexander Rubinstein. Washington police detained him on Friday 20 January when he was covering a protest against US President Donald Trump on the day of his inauguration. The correspondent was performing his professional duty, he had a press card with him, and nonetheless, Alexander Rubinstein was in police custody for almost 24 hours. The preliminary hearing in his case is due on 16 February.

After police arrested Rubinstein together with other journalists and protesters, they charged him with inciting a riot. Along with other reporters, they released him the following day. However, the charges against Rubinstein and several other reporters remain in force, which means they could face up to 10 years imprisonment or a 25,000 USD (1.497 million Roubles. 172,028 Renminbi. 1.703 million INR. 32,882 CAD. 33,122 AUD. 23,368 Euros. 19,922 UK Pounds) fine if found guilty. On Friday, Washington police dropped similar charges against Vocativ journalist Evan Engel after they considered additional evidence. William Miller, a spokesman for the US Attorney’s Office for Washington DC, said in a statement:

After consultation with the counsel for Mr Engel, who’s a journalist with Vocativ, as well as a review of evidence presented to us by law enforcement, we concluded that we wouldn’t proceed with the charge against this individual. The prosecution is in process of reviewing evidence in other cases related to the arrests in cooperation with the Metropolitan Police Department.

Meanwhile, Engel expressed gratitude to his legal advisers and all those who voiced support for him:

Today, my thoughts are with any other journalists who are facing charges for doing their jobs, as well as with journalists imprisoned around the world.

Police arrested at least six journalists reporting from the anti-Trump rally and charged them with felonies. Apart from Rubinstein and Engel, police detained and later released Jack Keller, a producer for the web documentary series Story of America, Shay Horse, independent photojournalist and live-streamer Matt Hopard, and freelance reporter Aaron Cantu on the same charges. Police treatment of these media workers drew sharp criticism from the media industry and civil right organisations. The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) called the arrests “a violation of journalistic freedom”, whilst Reporters Without Borders (RSF) demanded Washington authorities drop felony charges and called on the new US administration to “stop undermining the First Amendment and start defending it”. The American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU] of DC also condemned the way the police handled the situation during the mass protest. On Friday, its executive director, Monica Hopkins-Maxwell, said:

[The ACLU] is concerned that law enforcement may have violated demonstrator’s rights, including indiscriminately corralling and detaining individuals, including journalists and legal observers, who weren’t involved in any criminal activity.

”Outrage!” 6 Journalists Including RT Reporter Face “Inappropriate” Rioting Charges

28 January 2017



Wednesday, 18 January 2012

The Opponents of SOPA Win the First Round


The White House attack on SOPA legislation seems to be the last nail in the coffin of the controversial anti-piracy act, which, according to the opinion of the tech community and human rights advocates, threatens the openness of the Internet. Strong protests by numerous tech companies led by such giants as YouTube, Facebook, and Google, and followed by Obama’s call to shelve SOPA, have made the American Congress start preparing to drop the SOPA vote. However, the Motion Pictures Association of America, as well as other backers of the bill, isn’t ready to give up. Jimmy Wales, the co-founder and a promoter of the online non-profit encyclopaedia Wikipedia, which took an active role in the protests against the controversial legislation, wrote, “Student warning! Do your homework early. Wikipedia protesting bad law on Wednesday!”

The Stop Online Piracy Act, proposed by a group of legislators led by Republican Lamar Smith would allow the US Department of Justice, as well as copyright holders, to seek court orders against websites accused of copying copyrighted content. The actions could include blocking on-line paying companies such as Pay-Pal from doing business with the accused websites and requiring Internet providers to block access to such sites. The American movie and audio-recording industry greeted the proposed legislation with enormous enthusiasm, as they believe that SOPA would help to fight piracy {actually, they think that SOPA/PIPA would fatten their profits, ergo, they’re for it: editor}.

Meanwhile, a large community of tech companies, human rights activists, politicians, and academics opposed the bill. The opponents of SOPA believe that the passing of the legislation would allow government censorship and slow down technological progress. Numerous experts also claimed that whilst it would damage the openness of the world-wide web, SOPA would be extremely ineffective as an anti-piracy law. Lanham Napier, the CEO of the American hosting company Rackspace, addressed legislators, saying, “Part of the professional code of physicians is that, when they’re treating a patient’s ailment, they should ‘first, do no harm’. I wish more members of Congress would follow that rule. Instead, in the name of policing the online theft of intellectual property, key lawmakers are pushing a cure that’s worse than the disease”.

Whilst it’s been hard to predict how the confrontation will end, Obama’s recent attack on SOPA seems to have decided the fate of the legislation. The White House admitted in its official statement, “Let’s be clear… online piracy’s a real problem that harms the American economy, threatens jobs for significant numbers of middle-class workers, and hurts some of our nation’s most creative and innovative companies and entrepreneurs”. However, it also emphasised that it wouldn’t back a bill that “reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risks, or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet”.

Congressional leaders agree with the Obama’s administration opinion. However, whilst experts admit that the White House move was “very helpful”; they also believe that it’ll hardly mark the end of the confrontation. The interest of the sponsors of the act is too deep to allow them to give up on attempts to wage a war against pirates, even if this war bears the potential to damage the global Internet community decisively. Art Brodsky, director for Public Knowledge, a Washington DC-based public interest group, which has opposed SOPA, said, “You can’t view this bill in isolation; it’s part of a continuum. They’ll try to muddle through with something”. A statement of Rupert Murdoch, the owner of the Hollywood studio 20th Century Fox and one of the most prominent sponsors of the anti-piracy legislation supports such a view, saying in a Twitter criticising Obama’s stance against the SOPA, “So, Obama has thrown in his lot with Silicon Valley paymasters who threaten all software creators with piracy. Plain thievery”.

17 January 2012

Vladimir Gladkov

Voice of Russia World Service


Editor’s Note:

If Rupert Murdoch calls it “thievery”, then, it must be a GOOD thing. After all, Mr Murdoch’s the pleasant and charming gentleman who gave us The News of the World and Fox News… truly sterling enterprises, no?

Two of the worst extremist rightwing pigs pushing this legislation are US Representatives Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Lamar Smith (R-TX). These men are for permanent war in foreign parts, the TSA’s use of invasive public searches, the “War on Terror”, the shredding of labour laws and the social safety net, and abandoning taxation on multi-million estates and investment earnings. Therefore, why should it surprise you that they’re for censorship on the internet, as well? Oh… both of them are FOR criminalising abortion, which makes them “pro-life”… they’re for war, torture, the death penalty, and the ending of government social assistance, but being “for” the criminalisation of abortion makes them “pro-life”.  Because of that, ignorant konvertsy (especially nappy-wearing twits like Dreher, Mattingly, Paffhausen, and Freddie M-G) just gush over them. Note well that the extremist views of these gents don’t bother the konvertsy one little bit… that doesn’t matter (and the fact that these gents oppose the teachings of His Holiness and that they hate the Motherland and try to undermine it doesn’t bother them either). However, it does give one an idea of the intellectual level of the typical rightwing convert to Orthodoxy… not very high at all, is it?

There’s another, more sinister, level to all of this. You see, the real aim of SOPA/PIPA’s censorship. They want to restrict the use of “copyrighted” material only to those who pay off the original posters in one way or another. This would really be true in the case of information posted on corporate or institutional websites. That is, under SOPA, a conniving weasel like Lyonyo Kishkovsky could try to sue me if I used information from oca.org. He’s low enough to do it… remember his antics in the ‘70s with the Our Lady of Kazan dispute. If you support SOPA, you support greed, censorship, and the strong preying upon the weak (“the invisible hand of the market”).

NO… a thousand times NO. What kind of world do YOU want? If you want the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, simply vote for the Republican Party, and you’ll get it, in spades, and right smartly, too. That’s the way it is…


Blog at WordPress.com.