Topic: Donetsk, Kharkov, Lugansk - way to Russia. - page 364. (Read 734937 times)
new coat of arms of CCCP 2.0
vacation anyone?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BVeny-5PKdY#t=103
Now this is a war of information in full motion 
.
.Well, it was bound to happen. I am actually surprised this forum got hit this late. Most other forums that I keep an eye on, have been under heavy siege for months.
So , are you actually reading or viewing all those links videos from both sides
?I quit!
You need to keep an open mind. Sometimes you catch videos that are meant to be supporting protesters, but seem fake, and vice versa.
But I am not responding to those two unless someone else responds with any valid concerns.
http://m.dezinfo.net/foto/33980-sovremennaya-abxaziya-55-foto.html ruSSians was here in 2010
putins electorate
putins electorate
I love that map. But i think you can get a few more countries out of it:)
I laughed hard at Jewish Republic. It was a failed experiment of Stalin's (just like Ukraine is sadly on the way to becoming a failed experiment of Lenin's)
There was a joke, saying that the lowest concentration of Jews in the Soviet Union was in the Jewish Republic.
For Saami to be there, they'd need to annex a part of Norway. Saami were heavily oppressed in Norway up until recently, with people prohibited to learn and use their language, and being forcefully dispersed throughout the country. The king made a formal apology to them only a few years ago.
Lol.
First time when I checked those countries I though I saw MORDOR below Russia.
Now this is a war of information in full motion .
.Well, it was bound to happen. I am actually surprised this forum got hit this late. Most other forums that I keep an eye on, have been under heavy siege for months.
So , are you actually reading or viewing all those links videos from both sides
?I quit!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/03/21/where_the_fascists_are_122017.html
Where the Fascists Are
By Cathy Young - March 21, 2014
The claim that last month’s democratic revolution in Ukraine was actually driven by ultra-right extremists, fascists, or even “neo-Nazis” has been a staple of Kremlin propaganda. It is also echoed by Western pundits who think that Vladimir Putin is getting a bum rap and the United States is backing the bad guys in this conflict. It is true that far-right nationalists are a troubling, though by no means dominant, presence on Ukraine’s political scene and a potential problem for the new leadership’s quest for European integration. But the cries of “fascism” from Moscow and its apologists are breathtakingly hypocritical, considering the Putin regime’s entanglement with far-right, ultranationalist and, yes, fascist elements at home and abroad.
It’s hard to gauge the actual extent of extremist involvement in the Maidan protests, which began in late November in response to Yanukovych’s rejection of a European Union trade deal. At the start of February, Vyacheslav Likhachev, a Russian Jewish journalist and board member of the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress, estimated that “radical nationalists” made up about one percent of the protesters. On one occasion in the early days of the “Euromaidan,” a notorious hatemonger, poet Diana Kamlyuk, took advantage of an open microphone night to make overtly racist and anti-Semitic remarks; but Likhachev stressed that this was an isolated, widely condemned incident, and that the rallies featured prominent Jewish speakers as well as Jewish religious and cultural events.
As tensions between protesters and riot police escalated, the radicals took on a larger role—particularly Right Sector, a paramilitary group some view as bordering on neo-Nazism because of its admiration for World War II-era Ukrainian nationalist, onetime Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera. (While Bandera’s record on anti-Semitism is a matter of some dispute, his followers unquestionably committed atrocities toward Poles, Russians, Jews, and others; by any objective reckoning, he was certainly more terrorist than freedom fighter.) Right Sector has made some effort to improve its image: its leader, Dmitro Yarosh, has met with the Israeli ambassador in Kiev to assure him that the group strongly opposes anti-Semitism and xenophobia. Yarosh and other militants have also praised Jewish fighters on the Maidan. Still, concerns about their influence justifiably remain.
Another alarming factor is the nationalist party Svoboda (“Freedom”), whose head, 45-year-old Oleg Tyahnibok, has a history of anti-Semitic and racist comments—though he has tried to reinvent himself as a moderate. Svoboda has about 8 percent of the seats in Ukraine’s parliament; thanks to the deal brokered by Germany and France before Yanukovych’s resignation, it also holds four of the twenty posts in the interim government, including that of Minister of Defense. The party’s attempts to shed its thuggish reputation have not been entirely successful; on March 18, three Svoboda parliament members threatened and assaulted the chief of Ukraine’s TV Channel 1, angered by what they regarded as the station’s pro-Russian slant, and forced him to write a statement of resignation. The incident, which caused near-universal outrage, is now being investigated.
The good news, as historian Timothy Snyder points out in The New Republic, is that current polls show Svoboda getting 2 or 3 percent of the vote in May’s presidential election. And some reports on the right-wing menace in Ukraine clearly overstate the party’s impact. Thus, a March 13 column in the Los Angeles Times and a March 18 Foreign Policy article pointed to Svoboda’s successful push for a law making Ukrainian the country’s sole official language—without mentioning that Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov later vetoed the bill.
Meanwhile, in Russia, nationalists in the upper echelons of power include such prominent figures as former NATO envoy and current Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who first entered the political scene as a leader of the nationalist bloc Rodina (Motherland). In 2005, Rodina was banned from Moscow City Council elections for running a blatantly racist campaign ad: the clip showed three Azerbaijani migrants littering and insulting a Russian woman and Rogozin stepping in to tell them off, and ended with a slogan promising to “clean up the trash.” While Rogozin is no fan of America, he has some peculiar American fans: in 2011, a glowing tribute that concluded with, “Let’s hope that Rogozin rises to power in Russia—and for the rise of a ‘Rogozin’ in America and elsewhere throughout the West,” appeared on the “white identity” website, Occidental Observer.
Rodina co-founder and Rogozin’s erstwhile rival for its leadership, Sergei Glazyev, most recently served as Putin’s man in charge of developing the Customs Union—the alliance with Kazakhstan and Belarus that was also to include Ukraine. Like Rogozin, Glazyev has attracted the sympathetic attention of far-right kooks in the Unites States—in this case, Lyndon LaRouche: in 1999, LaRouche Books published an English translation of Glazyev’s book, “Genocide: Russia and the New World Order,” with a foreword by LaRouche himself.
But Rogozin and Glazyev are mere peons compared to self-style “traditionalist” intellectual Alexander Dugin, a writer and professor at Moscow State University. In his New Republic article, Snyder identifies Dugin—“an actual fascist”—as “the founder of the Eurasian movement,” the ideology that provides the foundation for Russia’s expansion into Ukraine.
In fact, Dugin—who, in his writings in the 1990s, was quite explicit about the fascist and even Nazi roots of his views, asserting that true fascism had never been tried and would be born in Russia—is more than just the father of an idea. As documented in a 2009 article by Ukrainian scholar Andreas Umland (who has also chronicled the rise of extremism in Ukraine), Dugin has extensive, close ties to Russia’s political elites and the pro-Kremlin media. A number of high-level officials and journalists have served on the leadership council of his organization, the International Eurasian Movement. Dugin’s admirers include Ivan Demidov, a TV producer who at one point, in 2008, headed the ideology section of the ruling party, United Russia.
Dugin’s frightening rhetoric has been on display in recent days. After a massive antiwar demonstration in Moscow on March 15, he wrote on his Facebook page, “This is no longer simply filth, ideological opponents, or dissenters, but a parade of traitors. Today, they have risen against the Russian people, against our State, against our history. They are defending murderers, occupiers, Nazis, and NATO. All the participants in this march of the fifth column have been condemned—by history, by the people, by us.” Then, he quoted a line from a famous wartime poem: “As many times as you see them, kill them.” (The poem, of course, referred to German invaders.)
If those are the ideologues, it’s hardly surprising that some of Russia’s foot soldiers in the conflict with Ukraine are of the brownshirt type. Most notable among these is Pavel Gubarev, the pro-Russian activist in Donetsk who briefly proclaimed himself the city’s “People’s Governor” and raised a Russian flag over the local government building. A few days after Gubarev gained notoriety, it was revealed that he had once been an activist in the militant group Russian National Unity, whose emblem bears an unmistakable resemblance to the swastika. (Photos of Gubarev in uniform made the rounds of the Internet.) And, shortly before the March 16 referendum, the Kremlin’s man in Crimea, Sergei Aksyonov, used a blatant anti-Semitic code in a televised speech, referring to Ukraine’s new leadership as “an unnatural union of cosmopolite oligarchs who have grown rich plundering the Soviet era’s heritage, and neo-Nazis.” Of course, “cosmopolite” was once an infamous Soviet euphemism for “Jew”—and it is no accident that the best-known business oligarch allied with the new government is a Jewish man, Ihor Kolomoysky.
Then there’s the matter of the “international observers” Moscow invited to the referendum in Crimea—a veritable freak central of neo-Stalinists and far rightists including Belgian neo-Nazi Luc Michel, Hungarian right-wing extremist Bela Kovacs, and Serbian-born American paleocon and war crime apologist Srđa (Serge) Trifković. Another observer, Polish parliament member Mateusz Piskorski, who praised the referendum in a Russia Today interview, is a former neo-Nazi in a very literal sense. As one of Poland’s leading newspapers, Gazeta Wyborcza, reported in 2006, in the late 1990s and early 2000s Piskorski published a magazine called Odala, which openly praised Nazi Germany, interviewed Holocaust deniers, and proclaimed that “considering the decay and multi-racialism of the West,” a united Slavic empire was “the only hope for the White Race.” Piskorski now belongs to Dugin’s Eurasian Movement.
Umland’s 2009 article on Dugin and creeping Russian fascism ended with the eerie prediction: “Should Dugin and his followers succeed in further extending their reach into Russian high politics and society at large, a new Cold War will be the least that the West should expect from Russia, during the coming years.” Perhaps fascism has indeed won—and not in Ukraine.
Where the Fascists Are
By Cathy Young - March 21, 2014
The claim that last month’s democratic revolution in Ukraine was actually driven by ultra-right extremists, fascists, or even “neo-Nazis” has been a staple of Kremlin propaganda. It is also echoed by Western pundits who think that Vladimir Putin is getting a bum rap and the United States is backing the bad guys in this conflict. It is true that far-right nationalists are a troubling, though by no means dominant, presence on Ukraine’s political scene and a potential problem for the new leadership’s quest for European integration. But the cries of “fascism” from Moscow and its apologists are breathtakingly hypocritical, considering the Putin regime’s entanglement with far-right, ultranationalist and, yes, fascist elements at home and abroad.
It’s hard to gauge the actual extent of extremist involvement in the Maidan protests, which began in late November in response to Yanukovych’s rejection of a European Union trade deal. At the start of February, Vyacheslav Likhachev, a Russian Jewish journalist and board member of the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress, estimated that “radical nationalists” made up about one percent of the protesters. On one occasion in the early days of the “Euromaidan,” a notorious hatemonger, poet Diana Kamlyuk, took advantage of an open microphone night to make overtly racist and anti-Semitic remarks; but Likhachev stressed that this was an isolated, widely condemned incident, and that the rallies featured prominent Jewish speakers as well as Jewish religious and cultural events.
As tensions between protesters and riot police escalated, the radicals took on a larger role—particularly Right Sector, a paramilitary group some view as bordering on neo-Nazism because of its admiration for World War II-era Ukrainian nationalist, onetime Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera. (While Bandera’s record on anti-Semitism is a matter of some dispute, his followers unquestionably committed atrocities toward Poles, Russians, Jews, and others; by any objective reckoning, he was certainly more terrorist than freedom fighter.) Right Sector has made some effort to improve its image: its leader, Dmitro Yarosh, has met with the Israeli ambassador in Kiev to assure him that the group strongly opposes anti-Semitism and xenophobia. Yarosh and other militants have also praised Jewish fighters on the Maidan. Still, concerns about their influence justifiably remain.
Another alarming factor is the nationalist party Svoboda (“Freedom”), whose head, 45-year-old Oleg Tyahnibok, has a history of anti-Semitic and racist comments—though he has tried to reinvent himself as a moderate. Svoboda has about 8 percent of the seats in Ukraine’s parliament; thanks to the deal brokered by Germany and France before Yanukovych’s resignation, it also holds four of the twenty posts in the interim government, including that of Minister of Defense. The party’s attempts to shed its thuggish reputation have not been entirely successful; on March 18, three Svoboda parliament members threatened and assaulted the chief of Ukraine’s TV Channel 1, angered by what they regarded as the station’s pro-Russian slant, and forced him to write a statement of resignation. The incident, which caused near-universal outrage, is now being investigated.
The good news, as historian Timothy Snyder points out in The New Republic, is that current polls show Svoboda getting 2 or 3 percent of the vote in May’s presidential election. And some reports on the right-wing menace in Ukraine clearly overstate the party’s impact. Thus, a March 13 column in the Los Angeles Times and a March 18 Foreign Policy article pointed to Svoboda’s successful push for a law making Ukrainian the country’s sole official language—without mentioning that Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov later vetoed the bill.
Meanwhile, in Russia, nationalists in the upper echelons of power include such prominent figures as former NATO envoy and current Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who first entered the political scene as a leader of the nationalist bloc Rodina (Motherland). In 2005, Rodina was banned from Moscow City Council elections for running a blatantly racist campaign ad: the clip showed three Azerbaijani migrants littering and insulting a Russian woman and Rogozin stepping in to tell them off, and ended with a slogan promising to “clean up the trash.” While Rogozin is no fan of America, he has some peculiar American fans: in 2011, a glowing tribute that concluded with, “Let’s hope that Rogozin rises to power in Russia—and for the rise of a ‘Rogozin’ in America and elsewhere throughout the West,” appeared on the “white identity” website, Occidental Observer.
Rodina co-founder and Rogozin’s erstwhile rival for its leadership, Sergei Glazyev, most recently served as Putin’s man in charge of developing the Customs Union—the alliance with Kazakhstan and Belarus that was also to include Ukraine. Like Rogozin, Glazyev has attracted the sympathetic attention of far-right kooks in the Unites States—in this case, Lyndon LaRouche: in 1999, LaRouche Books published an English translation of Glazyev’s book, “Genocide: Russia and the New World Order,” with a foreword by LaRouche himself.
But Rogozin and Glazyev are mere peons compared to self-style “traditionalist” intellectual Alexander Dugin, a writer and professor at Moscow State University. In his New Republic article, Snyder identifies Dugin—“an actual fascist”—as “the founder of the Eurasian movement,” the ideology that provides the foundation for Russia’s expansion into Ukraine.
In fact, Dugin—who, in his writings in the 1990s, was quite explicit about the fascist and even Nazi roots of his views, asserting that true fascism had never been tried and would be born in Russia—is more than just the father of an idea. As documented in a 2009 article by Ukrainian scholar Andreas Umland (who has also chronicled the rise of extremism in Ukraine), Dugin has extensive, close ties to Russia’s political elites and the pro-Kremlin media. A number of high-level officials and journalists have served on the leadership council of his organization, the International Eurasian Movement. Dugin’s admirers include Ivan Demidov, a TV producer who at one point, in 2008, headed the ideology section of the ruling party, United Russia.
Dugin’s frightening rhetoric has been on display in recent days. After a massive antiwar demonstration in Moscow on March 15, he wrote on his Facebook page, “This is no longer simply filth, ideological opponents, or dissenters, but a parade of traitors. Today, they have risen against the Russian people, against our State, against our history. They are defending murderers, occupiers, Nazis, and NATO. All the participants in this march of the fifth column have been condemned—by history, by the people, by us.” Then, he quoted a line from a famous wartime poem: “As many times as you see them, kill them.” (The poem, of course, referred to German invaders.)
If those are the ideologues, it’s hardly surprising that some of Russia’s foot soldiers in the conflict with Ukraine are of the brownshirt type. Most notable among these is Pavel Gubarev, the pro-Russian activist in Donetsk who briefly proclaimed himself the city’s “People’s Governor” and raised a Russian flag over the local government building. A few days after Gubarev gained notoriety, it was revealed that he had once been an activist in the militant group Russian National Unity, whose emblem bears an unmistakable resemblance to the swastika. (Photos of Gubarev in uniform made the rounds of the Internet.) And, shortly before the March 16 referendum, the Kremlin’s man in Crimea, Sergei Aksyonov, used a blatant anti-Semitic code in a televised speech, referring to Ukraine’s new leadership as “an unnatural union of cosmopolite oligarchs who have grown rich plundering the Soviet era’s heritage, and neo-Nazis.” Of course, “cosmopolite” was once an infamous Soviet euphemism for “Jew”—and it is no accident that the best-known business oligarch allied with the new government is a Jewish man, Ihor Kolomoysky.
Then there’s the matter of the “international observers” Moscow invited to the referendum in Crimea—a veritable freak central of neo-Stalinists and far rightists including Belgian neo-Nazi Luc Michel, Hungarian right-wing extremist Bela Kovacs, and Serbian-born American paleocon and war crime apologist Srđa (Serge) Trifković. Another observer, Polish parliament member Mateusz Piskorski, who praised the referendum in a Russia Today interview, is a former neo-Nazi in a very literal sense. As one of Poland’s leading newspapers, Gazeta Wyborcza, reported in 2006, in the late 1990s and early 2000s Piskorski published a magazine called Odala, which openly praised Nazi Germany, interviewed Holocaust deniers, and proclaimed that “considering the decay and multi-racialism of the West,” a united Slavic empire was “the only hope for the White Race.” Piskorski now belongs to Dugin’s Eurasian Movement.
Umland’s 2009 article on Dugin and creeping Russian fascism ended with the eerie prediction: “Should Dugin and his followers succeed in further extending their reach into Russian high politics and society at large, a new Cold War will be the least that the West should expect from Russia, during the coming years.” Perhaps fascism has indeed won—and not in Ukraine.
I love that map. But i think you can get a few more countries out of it:)
I laughed hard at Jewish Republic. It was a failed experiment of Stalin's (just like Ukraine is sadly on the way to becoming a failed experiment of Lenin's)
There was a joke, saying that the lowest concentration of Jews in the Soviet Union was in the Jewish Republic.
For Saami to be there, they'd need to annex a part of Norway. Saami were heavily oppressed in Norway up until recently, with people prohibited to learn and use their language, and being forcefully dispersed throughout the country. The king made a formal apology to them only a few years ago.
Now this is a war of information in full motion .
.Well, it was bound to happen. I am actually surprised this forum got hit this late. Most other forums that I keep an eye on, have been under heavy siege for months.
I love that map. But i think you can get a few more countries out of it:)
How to lose (I am translating it in a polite form
) a country in one month.Beginner's guide by Turchinov and Yatsenjuk.
http://youtu.be/jek_QKlsM3Q how news are made in ruSSia
https://www.facebook.com/ukraine.info/photos/a.184872778263688.48930.184860581598241/593305627420399/?type=1 titushki taking money for antimaidan protests
https://www.facebook.com/ukraine.info/photos/a.184872778263688.48930.184860581598241/593305627420399/?type=1 titushki taking money for antimaidan protests
Vilaly Churkin’s Mendacious Claim that Most Countries Recognize Crimea’s Integration with Russia
Posted on April, 7, 22:52 0 Comments Tags: Crimea, Russia, UN
March 6, 2014 Russian news agency «RIA Novosti» published report of Russia’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin in which he said that Crimea’s intergration with Russia is a geopolitical act and the majority of the countries recognise it de facto or de jure.
Чypкин
«It is a new geopolitical fact: Crimea has become a part of Russian Federation. No need to launch an energetic campaign here, I think. The majority of countries recognise Crimea’s integration with Russia “de-jure” or “de-facto”, » — he said, answering the question of a Russian television channel NTV journalist about the further steps in word community’s recognition of Crimea.
However, only 11 countries (among them North Korea, Syria, Sudan and Zimbabwe and Russia) voted against «Ukraine Territorial Integrity» resolution during the U.N. General Assembly session.
That is why the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine representatives called the claims of Russia’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin that the majority of countries recognise Crimea’s integrity with Russia «another nonsense and disinformation».
«Either Russian officials are horrible at maths or it is a distortion of facts for the sake of wishful thinking. The real state of affairs was clarified by the voting for “Ukraine Territorial Integrity” resolution during the U.N. General Assembly session on March 27. 47 countries contributed to the creation of the resolution. 100 countries supported the resolution. Only 11 countries (including Russia) — voted against it, » — stated Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine representative.
Униaн
«Also, this voting “against” by the tiny group of 10 countries does not mean that all those countries recognised the annexation of Crimea by Russia de facto or de jure. We all remember words of Belarus president Alexander Lukashenko (sadly, his country voted “against” the resolution), when he said Belarus has no plans for legal relations with Crimea, » — he added.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also notes «earlier we heard from Mr. Churkin that “93 countries in the U.N. did not support territorial integrity of Ukraine.” That is another nonsense. According to the article 18 of the U.N. Chapter, the decisions of the general assembly are made by the present delegations that vote (“for” or “against”). Therefore, the countries that did not vote when the Ukrainian resolution was reviewed or “abstained”, passed their votes to the majority, for the resolution, thus supporting it, » — underlined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine representative.
Currently there are 193 countries members of the U.N. Among the internationally recognised countries, only the Holy See and State of Palestine are not members of the U.N., among partially recognised: SADR, Taiwan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Republic of Kosovo, Sovereign Military Order of Malta and Northern Cyprus.
http://www.stopfake.org/en/vilaly-churkin-s-mendacious-claim-that-most-countries-recognize-crimea-s-integration-with-russia/
Provocateur in Gorlovka detected http://vz.ru/news/2014/4/14/681998.html
Quote
«Пpи штypмe ГУ MBC Укpaины в Гopлoвкe, вocпoльзoвaвшиcь нepaзбepиxoй, poль pyкoвoдитeля oпoлчeния нa ceбя взял зaвepбoвaнный Киeвoм пpoвoкaтop, кoтopый пpeдcтaвилcя пoдпoлкoвникoм poccийcкoй apмии, пoзиpyя пepeд кaмepoй. B Гopлoвкe был зaмeчeн киeвcкий aгeнт, дeпyтaт oдeccкoгo oблcoвeтa Aлeкceй Гoчapeнкo», – cooбщaeтcя нa cтpaницe «Югo-Bocтoчнoй Фeдepaции» в coцceти «BКoнтaктe».
A bit simplified translation:
During the fighting in Gorlovka, using the confusion, the command of the protesters was taken by a Kiev-conscripted provocator, who presented himself as a lieutenant colonel of the Russian Army, and poses before cameras. A Kiev agent is detected in Gorlovka, who is in reality deputy of the Odessa regional council Aleksje Gocharenko."
The Russian TV channel NTV distorted information given by Ukrainian channels, using it out of context
Posted on April, 10, 14:53 0 Comments Tags: Russia, Russian propaganda, нтв
The Russian NTV program “Today. Summary program“ from April 6, 2014 showed footage of two Ukrainian television programs -” TSN. Weekly “(TV channel “1 +1″) and “Agents of influence” (TV channel “NTN”) in an altered context, and called them “ruthless examples of anti-Russian propaganda”, writes Mediasapiens.
In particular, NTV used the story of “The war of provocations»” (“Agents of influence”), which was reporting on the creation of Russian propaganda. A NTN journalist made a staged footage of alleged non-existent characters, the residents of the Rostov region of Russia, who supposedly desire to be part of Russia. Based on a fictitious story the journalist explained how Russian TV channels engage in an information war against Ukraine.
After a fictional story, the author of “War of provocations” explains (video 4:43): that everything just shown to the audience is solid fiction and all characters of the staged scenes are just actors. They demonstrate the mechanism of information warfare. “Similar stories, but with the opposite content are regularly shown on Russian channels,” concluded the author in the story.
However, the Russian channel NTV showed the footage story “War of provocations” without such an explanation, describing it as propaganda against Russia.
HTH_1
HTH_2
Also the Russian channel distorted the context of the story of Olga Malchevska (TSN.Weekly) on the situation in Crimea after the annexation. The TSN reporter used black-and-white footage when talking about the shortage of goods and delays in payments on the peninsula.
NTV showed a part of the story, without explaining the context, calling it a lie and information war against Russia.
TCH_1
TCH_2
In addition, NTV is trying to convince its audience that Ukrainians used to receive information about the events from Russian TV channels, which now stopped broadcasting on the territory of Ukraine. However, Russian media had minor ratings in Ukraine. In early February, according to ITC, “NTV.World” was on the 25th place of the rating (0.09%) with an audience share of 0.46%. At the same time, most viewers preferred the Ukrainian TV channel “Inter”, which rating is 2.32% and an audience share of 11.43% (18-54, all Ukraine).
However, in the same program, Russian journalists reported false information about an alleged attempt by the Ukrainian side to sell aid of the U.S. military on the Internet (video 8:50). This is information we have already refuted. The same news program reported a “famous” story about a Kharkiv professor who was allegedly fired from the V,N. Karazin Kharkiv National University for wanting to speak in Russian. We have also refuted that story.
Source: osvita.mediasapiens.ua
http://www.stopfake.org/en/the-russian-tv-channel-ntv-distorted-information-given-by-ukrainian-channels-using-it-out-of-context/
Russian Channel One Lies About Events in Donetsk, Using a Month Old Video
Posted on April, 8, 13:24 0 Comments Tags: Pavel Gubarev, Ukraine, Дoнeцк, Киeв
Today «Channel One» published news and video about fights in Eastern Ukraine. They informed that the police of Donetsk promised to use no force, quoting Roman Romanov, whom they introduced as the chief officer of the Head Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Donetsk Oblast.
Пepвый кaнaл
However, Roman Romanov was fired from this position a month ago. The official web site of the Ministry of Internal Affairs posted this information back on March 6.
MBC
Also, on the video presented by «Channel One» one can notice Pavel Gubarev sitting behind Romanov’s back, while Gubarev is currently held in pretrial detention centre in Kiev, therefore there was no way for him to be present in the regional state administration building in Donetsk on April 7.
гyбapeв
Same video dated March 3 and shot from a different perspective can be found on YouTube.
http://www.stopfake.org/en/russian-channel-one-lies-about-events-in-donetsk-using-a-month-old-video/
Now this is a war of information in full motion .
. Jump to: