To mess with one is to mess with all

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The Vagabond


These are just clumsy moves of a cornered player who doesn't really know how to fight back in this situation. But, once again, these are in reality just small details. You should try to see a bigger picture, on a deeper level.

Another Bush apologist

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by C0ckney


i disagree somewhat with your assessment. however leaving that aside, do you not think your impression of the british press might have something to do with the almighty ****-up that new labour has made of things?

Do you honestly think that if Putin f**ked up as much as you think Blair did, the Russian media, esp the networks, would be as unanimously unfriendly?

[Heresson]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
On the one hand, Poland + the Baltic trio greatly benefit from the economic ties with Russia. On the other hand, they don't miss a single opportunity to put a spoke in Russia's wheel, so to say. They do their best in destroying Russia's relations with the EU. Two of the Baltic states blatantly violate human rights, and the EU does nothing to stop it. You say those are tiny states? First, Poland is quite big. Second, they enjoy the umbrella of the powerful western organizations. They do their dirty tricks on Russia from under this umbrella. Otherwise why would they be so insolent. What Russia does is ugly and I don't approve it. On the other hand, I can't figure out better ways to fight this back. It's not normal that countries that economically so much benefit from you behave with you in that way.

what are the polish dirty tricks against Russia? Our current fm can hardly think for herself. A thought that she's a cunning fox biting Russia while nobody's looking is funny.
Poland has a deficit in trade with Russia, which means Russia benefits from this trade more than we do...

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
ive only followed the UK press since 2001. At least at that time the Guardian and the Indy didnt seem to keen on New Labour. Ive never really looked at the Sun, US websites dont link to them all that much. I was also under the impression that the Times of London has supported the Tories, throughout this period, am I incorrect?

you've never heard of the sun! page 3? surely not...

the times while certainly having its fair share of tory columnists, has editorially at least, since 1997, been a firm backer of the new labour project. in more recent years they have grown more sceptical and cynical towards the blair government, rather like most of the press and population as a whole.

i think in this country papers tend not to be so much mouthpieces for certain political parties, but rather for certain ideological viewpoints. so the indy & the guardian may well have criticised new labour for not going far enough in their first term, while the times would of been supportive of blair 'the natural successor to thatcher'. if you look today at what the right wing press (mail, telegraph & express) has to say about cameron and his 'new tories', a lot of it isn't positive and some quite hostile.

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Do you honestly think that if Putin f**ked up as much as you think Blair did, the Russian media, esp the networks, would be as unanimously unfriendly?

well i would think that the differences between the british and russian media don't really need to be spelt out.

the unfriendliness towards blair as you percive it, is what i would take issue with.

edit: ah actually i'm going to write a proper response to this tomorrow, when i'm less tired.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
ive only followed the UK press since 2001. At least at that time the Guardian and the Indy didnt seem to keen on New Labour. Ive never really looked at the Sun, US websites dont link to them all that much. I was also under the impression that the Times of London has supported the Tories, throughout this period, am I incorrect?

The tide has turned against Blair in recent years, but from his election and through most of his first term it seemed he could do little wrong. I expect that the Graun and Indie at the next election will end up supporting New Labour again. I don't see the Times as pro-Tory these days. It was in the past, and may have a couple of Tory columnists, but it publishes other views too, and the tone and content of the actual news articles doesn't favour a party, in my view.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Heresson


what are the polish dirty tricks against Russia? Our current fm can hardly think for herself. A thought that she's a cunning fox biting Russia while nobody's looking is funny.
Poland has a deficit in trade with Russia, which means Russia benefits from this trade more than we do...

Not only the deficit that is important, but also %% of the economy involved. If say 25% of the Baltic economy is bound on Russia, one may wonder whether it is wise to behave that way with so important economic partner.

[Dinner]

There is the current statue issue in Latvia but specifically what are the other things which the Baltic states are doing? I've heard some allegations that the Balts repress their Russian minorities but I don't know the details. What is it which Russia is claiming they do and what is the Baltic response?

[Pekka]

One thing that I believe is a major issue is not granting a minority status of such that would give them services in their own language.

I personally don't believe in this type of right at all. Not in this particular case, not in any other case either. I don't think a state should be forced to have official languages more than the original one. So this would be a universal issue with me.

Of course this doesn't mean that there should be no interpreters and people helping folks who can't speak the native language, and thus keeping them out of effective integration and society. I don't consider this to be a human rights issue at all. I consider this a personal choice. Choice for many, not all of course.

[Heresson]

I repeat: what are those dirty tricks?

[The Vagabond]

Perhaps the biggest problem is their refusal to grant citizenship to the minorities (for those who were living there at the moment of the USSR collapse). Recently I read the CV of a guy from Latvia. The column "citizenship/nationality" states "no citizenship, permanent resident of Latvia".

As for the services in their own language, first of all, the educational services are meant. And the problem is not that "they don't grant" such services, but that they abolish the existing ones.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Heresson
I repeat: what are those dirty tricks?

Well perhaps not exactly "tricks", but just supporting everything anti-Russian both within the EU and outside of it.

[Pekka]

Well, the only problem I would see if there were services that were abolished. I don't think it's an issue at all to not set up or alter services, that would ultimately cost a lot of money as well as bring up the question of what about other minorities and their rights in this same regard.

However, abolishing existing ones, well, that might be a bit problematic. I woudl consider it an issue, of course we'd have to see every case individually, but on a general level, this might be an issue.

[Pekka]

But again, show me a country where this isn't the case. Hey, my mom is a permanent resident in the US with no citizenship and rightly so. She's a tax payer and active in the community. So what? If she wants, she can always return here if she wants to be a in place where she is a citizen.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Pekka
However, abolishing existing ones, well, that might be a bit problematic. I woudl consider it an issue, of course we'd have to see every case individually, but on a general level, this might be an issue.

Yes, abolishing the existing services is generally viewed as more grave violation of human rights than just refusing to install new ones.