January 13, 2010 — Contents

WEDNESDAY JANUARY 13 CONTENTS

(1)  EDITORIAL:   Russia’s Empty Schools

(2)  Rotten Russia

(3)  Putin Betrays Russia’s Future

(4)  Stay away from the BRIC Bully

(5)  More Russian Tennis Humiliation

34 responses to “January 13, 2010 — Contents

  1. Very good articles this week. Thanks!

    • It seems the man is not quite stable. His philosphizing looks very disorganized so that it’s unclear what it is exactly that he is saying

    • Naylor pretends to have no knowledge of the real Russian police brutality – like the many thousands of people who were kidnapped and then either tortured to death or murdered without trace.

      Associated Press yesterday on the Russian Dirty War:

      http://www.eveningsun.com/ci_14160694

      A central tactic in the war, activists say, is forced disappearances – the brazen snatching of young people from their homes or off the street, often by gangs of masked men who move freely, even in areas heavily patrolled by Russian military and police. The pace of forced disappearances has doubled in the past year, following a spike in militant attacks on police and authorities, including suicide bombings, ambushes and assassinations.

      The lucky ones are brutally interrogated and released. Some turn up dead, their bodies bearing the marks of torture. Other families face the anguish of never knowing the fate of a father, brother or son.

      But critics say the kidnappings have aggravated rather than reduced tensions along Russia’s southern border.

      Some analysts warn that, after five years of relative calm, anger over the latest rash of kidnappings could inspire a fresh wave of terror attacks in Russia, a country that supplies the world with much of its oil and gas and has one of the world’s largest nuclear arsenals.

      • In recent months kidnappers have increasingly targeted activists like Estemirova, in what rights groups fear is part of a plan to intimidate them into silence. In Ingushetia and Chechnya, where thousands of people have disappeared during post-Soviet Russia’s two wars against separatists, dozens of people who once monitored rights violations have stopped working or fled.

        “All rights activists are uneasy,” said one Ingush activist, who spoke on condition he not be identified because he feared for his life. He was planning to leave for France, he said, after security officials approached him and warned him he might be killed.

        He said one officer told him: “We are with the special services, we are not simple cops. Think about that.”

        Lidia Yusupova, a Chechen human rights lawyer and 2009 candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize, told The Associated Press she may have been a target of the same shadowy men who abducted and killed Estemirova.

        Two suspicious men staked out her apartment in Grozny and questioned neighbors the day before Estemirova was killed, her friends told her. She wasn’t home at the time.

        “It could not be just a coincidence,” she said in an interview in the cramped offices of a Chechen rights group in central Moscow. “Maybe they had an order to take away some well-known rights activist.”

        Some are abducted, activists say, after their names surface during brutal interrogations. Often, kidnappers target the relatives of known or suspected militants.

        In some cases, the disappeared seem to have the wrong friends, attend the wrong mosque or otherwise raise suspicions, for example, by having a wolf call ring tone on their cell phone. In the Caucasus, the wolf is a symbol of resistance to Russian rule.

  2. So much for the Russophiles ranting that there is “no creeping annexation of Georgia” in places like South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

    Take a look at what is written on the roadblock near Akhalgori.

    http://www.rferl.org/content/South_Ossetia_To_Require_Georgian_IDs_Translated_Into_Russian/1923831.html

    A hint, it does not say “South Ossetia” or “Georgia”

  3. This link has a 15 second video clip from 28-Oct-2004 (three days before the Ukrainian presidential election of 31-Oct-2004) of the “three stooges”.

    The “three stooges” being – putin, yanukovich, and medvedev.

    http://www.xoxol.org/putin/putin11.html

  4. The problem Mr Naylor has is that no one bothers to read his pro Putin clap trap; Hes only had 650 hits on his profile. He has such a boring writing style which lacks any wit or charm and therefore is unable to command the attention of the reader. I would imagine those unlucky enough to click onto his boring blog take a once bitten twice shy attitude and vow never to return again.

    Now compare his mindless dull as dish water waffle to this fantastic site which tells the truth in a frank and compelling way. The statistics speak for themselves

    Pro Putin Naylor 650 hits.

    Larussophobe 1,481,460 hits

    People are not stupid we can sort out the wheat from the chaff.

      • Woah Naylor, you should keep of the drugs dude!

        No wonder your writings seem like the crazed rantings of a drugged up idiot, they are!!

        • When I heard he’s suposedly “a teacher”, I imagined a guy in a suit or maybe at least a nerd sweater, and definitely with glasses.

          But instead, the best photo he had to share with us and the rest of the Internet was of a hard-drinking unemployed/homeless/”lower working class” guy with wild eyes.

          So, Naylor Karl is now posting here as King Arthur? I think he should befriend “Kadyrov fan” (Roman Kadyrov? Arthur Kadyrov?) and his various alter-egos :)

  5. Robert, Andrew,

    You say it is your job to patrol the La Russophobe forum. Out of curiosity – how much do you get paid? And by whom?

    I have noticed that you log between 55 and 65 hours per week here. Do you get paid overtime? At what rate?

    • Now Arthur (are you kidding, what moron calls thier kid Arthur in this day and age), who said it was our job to “patrol” the forum, certainly not me.

      Go bend over for tour KGB masters again Naylor, you little weed.

      • Andrew,

        You are a stupid bigot. There is something endearingly insane of you to call my parents “morons” for naming me Arthur. If you ar enot aware of my name, please read Wikipedia:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_(disambiguation)

        Arthur is a common masculine given name.

        • Oh I am well aware of it, but its kind of like calling someone Alfred, just historically overused and somewhat dated.

          I think you are projecting Arthur, why all this business about “masculinity”? Do you have some issues you need counselling with?

          By the way, you seem to me to be more like the mythological Arthur, someone who shagged his own sister then killed his the son he nocked her up with.

          TTFN

          • You are a little child, Drew, and you are a living advertisement as to why the Ossetians and Abkhazians need protection from infantile imbeciles like yourself.

            • Are you an orphan?

            • Now Arthur, you brought the subject of masculinity up.

              BTW I’m not Georgian.

              • {Now Arthur, you brought the subject of masculinity up.]

                Where? All I did was cut-and-paste the definition of ‘Arthur’ from Wikipedia. I didn’t even notice this word until you went ballistic.

                Truly, if the use of the term “masculine” in linguistics bothers and insults you so much – I will try to scratch it from my cut-and-pastes here from now on.

                • Ballistic?

                  Sorry old son, I suggest you take a look in the mirror.

                  Oviously you have no sense of humour.

                  • Every joke (especially as inane as yours) has a grain of truth. Nobody, except you, Drew, even notices the use of the term “masculine” in grammar. Only you find sexual connotation in this standard grammar term. And we all know what Freud says about this. You are way too sensitive to the word “masculine”, my effeminate friend. It’s just linguistics, and is not meant to remind you of your inferiority.

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculine_(grammar)

                    Grammatical gender

                    In linguistics, grammatical genders, sometimes also called noun classes, are classes of nouns reflected in the behavior of associated words.
                    If a language distinguishes between masculine and feminine gender, for instance, then each noun belongs to one of those two genders.

                    • Gee touchy today aren’t you Arthur.

                      Nice to see you wiggling on the hook of your own creation, though it looks like you enjoy being penetrated from the sounds of things.

                      LOL

            • Actually the Ossetians and Abkhazians need Russian protection from international justice for their monstrous crimes against humanity, such as ethnic cleansing, mass murder, rape, pillage, and the attempts to destroy Georgian cultural heritage sites in both provinces.

  6. [I think you are projecting Arthur, why all this business about “masculinity”? ]

    If you were intelligent enough to click on the Wikipedia link provided, you would discover that this is the word that Wikipedia used, and I quote:

    “Arthur (disambiguation)

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Arthur is a common masculine given name. Arthur may refer to:

    1 People
    1.1 Surname
    1.2 First name
    2 Music
    3 Fiction
    4 Places
    4.1 Australia
    4.2 Canada
    4.3 New Zealand
    4.4 United States ”

    Evidently, the Wikipedia people use this term “masculine” as a synonym for “male”.

    Why did Wikipedia’s use of the term “masculine” provoke such an hysterical reaction from you – well, that’s something for your sexopathologist, urologist, endocrinologist, psychiatrist and wife to worry about, boy.

    • I just have fun winding Russophiles like you up, and given the way you took the bait, I suggest you do have issues.

    • It’s not “Wikipedia’s use”, but some user’s use. You know I can go there and edit it into something like “Arthur is a common queer name” (and so on) this very minute, right? And using Wikipedia as an argument in a discussion is really lame, for the reason stated above.

      But yeah, I’m probably just butthurt because I just checked and according to “Wikipedia’s use” my name is actually not a “common masculine” one like yours. Oh no!

      Hey, I wonder if you got your whole so-extensive knowledge of Russia from Wikipedia too? You’re quoting this website directly all the time.

  7. I pity you, boy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s