Remember the story I posted a couple of weeks ago, about a member of Putin’s advance party to Kennebunkport trying to buy whisky with a fake $100 bill?
Well, it’s hit the mainstream – big time. A (rather deranged, it must be said) CNN presenter, has decided that the money came right from the top:
“I have a sneaking suspicion that this counterfeiting can be traced all the way up to Putin himself. From arms and oil deals with everyone from Venezuela to Iran, this guy is in bed with evil. […] So, Putin, one way or another… could he be behind this counterfeiting?
Don’t believe me? Watch the video for yourself:
Bonkers. And, if this constitutes prime time US journalism, ever so slightly scary. I mean, I remember that US news seemed terrible when I lived over there a few years ago, but I hadn’t realised it had gotten quite this bad.
(Thanks to Robert Amsterdam for the tip).
There’s a reason why media has such a low reputation among the masses. By no means does American mass media have a monopoly on lousy journalism.
Hacks pleasing the hacks, as opposed to journalists concerned with public sentiment and basic decency.
Those undemocratically selected folks who make dubious determinations on what is and isn’t acceptable commentary.
Like someone in cyber claiming to be a “historian”, while carrying on in a very un-historian like manner.
Or the frequent instances of caricaturing with adjectives like “miserable” and “sucks”, which factually overlook numerous aspects to a given topic.
“STUPID” I am glad I moved from the USA!
A story about a fake $100 involves a discussion on the failings of the Russian state and all the negative aspects of Putin’s premiership. There must be some logic in there but i can’t see it.
How has prime time news in the USA ended up with moron’s like that presenting it.
“Putin no longer gets the benefit of the doubt” – Thats is “top-notch” political observation/investigation. Is he a relative of Sherlock Holmes?
Did anyone see Dateline on NBC about Litvinenko on Sunday? That was the same type of journalism.
The BBC has had its share of not so great journalism as well.
Last fall, the Washington Post carried a story about a counterfeiting ring traced to South Ossetia.
But that clip is unreal.
Suppose CNN had existed in the Sixties, and had predicted that Nikita Krushchev would come to the US and take off his shoe while speaking at the UN. Ridiculous?
Suppose it had predicted that Putin would make jokes about rape in front of a diplomatic delegation and reporters. Crazy?
Suppose it had suggested in 1991 that Russians would soon elect a proud KGB by a landslide, abolish local elections, crush the media. Would you have laughed at them?
In Russia, the impossible is often commonplace.
Meanwhile, why is OK to assume that one incident on CNN is a basis to question the whole of American journalism, but not OK for CNN to assume that one incident of counterfeiting could be a basis to condemn the Putin regime? The idiotic hypocrisy and ignorance in this virtual room is so thick you could cut it with a knife. And CNN, if at all, is only a small part of it.
Ehm is that meant seriously? looks more like a late night show
Regarding some earlier comments made at this thread:
Putin’s rape comments were meant to be off the record. This doesn’t excuse what he said. Note that the Israeli delegation was over-heard appreciably laughing at those comments. BTW, did JRL carry any stories about that incident? Has Putin ever committed rape like what has been accused of the referenced (in his comments) Israeli politician? Has Putin been shown to be more unfaithful than Bill Clinton or JFK?
There’re plenty of flaws to be found with English language mass media. Conversely, not all of Russian mass media is so bad.
The “abolish local elections..” line isn’t precise. Local elections continue on and the fact of the matter is that prior to Putin’s proposed restructuring of the Russian constitution, a number of republics had Soviet like elections processess. This is why many in Russia supported Putin’s proposed restructuring of the Russian constitution.
As for Putin’s KGB background, the KGB was known to hire the brightest in Soviet society. A number of KGB personnel were far more well versed in western ways when compared to other Soviet officials. Putin supported the late reformist mayor of St. Petersburg (Anatoly Sobchak).
One possible fake $100 bill and it immediately tracks all the way back to Putin? Stretching… What liquor store clerk in Keni-what-port, Maine even knows Russian when they hear it? Stretch further, you can reach you goal…
“Putin no longer gets the benefit of the doubt” — So Russia is guilty without proof. Obviously this is not journalism.
This reminds me when CNN’s Anderson Cooper implied that the American honey bee disappearance was caused by Russia.
And let’s suppose that it would turn out that thieving “democrats” supported by the United States would rob Russia blindly in the 1990s. Crazy? Not.
What about a Russian oligarch morphs from a math teacher, to billionaire, to supposed political free speech opposition opponent? Ridiculous? Nah.
Unfortunately, any ridiculous argument about Russia can also find its converse.
These opinions by Glen Beck are a stretch and do not meet any standards of journalism. Just listen to some of the words that Glen used: “May have been” “isn’t really clear” “I have sneaking suspicion” “and this is just a suspicion” All this adds up to Glen is making up a load of manure…
Should the psychopathic LaRussophobe boys continue to post here — I’ll leave.
Should the psychopathic LaRussophobe boys continue to post here — I’ll leave.
I don’t think any self-respecting blog would let these people mess things up. If they showed up at my blog, their comments would be deleted without hesitation — even if all they wrote was “It’s 5pm here at our asylum, and the sun is shining”
I cannot understand what is the problem with Putin being ex-KGB; a not so senior operative at that.
George Bush Snr was director of CIA before being elected to the US Presidency. Are Putin’s critics suggesting that the CIA was and remains the bastion of morality in the civilised world? Without any doubt Bush senior would have got his hands dirty within the CIA.
So there we have it. Putin is evil because last weeek he met with Chavez? And he is making deals with Iran?
The journalist is a moron.
Errata. Calling him a journalist is too kind a word. My apologies.
Hi Sir Ivan:
Bush was to the CIA what Trotsky was to the Red Army. Both were politicos who were brought into those orgs. as outsiders for the purpose of giving their leaders a better grasp of what those establishments were doing.
Having seen this at other venues, censorship is a horrid thing. It’s one thing to have a pesky troll repeat bullshit. Quite another for someone to come on in a civil enough way and state their views.
From what has so far been posted, it’s good to have LR’s comments posted here. Siberian Light and Johnson’s Russia List have given LR more credibility than some other outlets which are arguably more deserved of respectful recognition.
I like the spirit of fair debate. One which is preferably respectful. I absolutely loathe the scenario where the host/moderator shows clear bias for one party in an exchange. If the ref is clearly cheating for one side, the wronged party has a legitimate basis to withdraw altogether with a detailed reason as they leave the scene.
Some pointed comments to someone who I’d expressed respect for.
In the spirit of encouraging intelligent dialogue on FSU related matter, note the article/discussion at this link:
there is no debate with LR. It’s an assembly of psychopaths with no inclination to debate. As I said, should they ever show up on my blog, I’ll delete their commentary immediately.
It’s people like that who contribute to war, genocide, and all the other horrors on this planet with their sick hatred.
Along with others, I loathe some of the half truths and outrightly incorrect statements said at that site. I’m also on record for regretting how some established venues have shown a bias for that entity over others who don’t engage in such manner.
As per these recent exchanges, as long as LR behaves in an acceptable enough way, there’s good reason to argue the facts with it. The stated “it” is said in lieu of how several folks believe that LR is a more than one person operation.
Carrying on in this way serves to highlight the dubious selection process of those established venues showing a preference for LR over some others.
I want to once again note how without any legitimacy whatsoever a human rights attorney (Ethan Burger) accused my work of having a “strong anti-Semitic flavor”. This was stated at Siberian Light. He said this while acknowledging not being familiar with my work. Is this the kind of intellect which should be propped? SL allowed me to post a rebuttal. In turn, the feedback sent to me was 100% in my favor. That support came from two persons who have sharply disagreed with me on other points.
Note how this human rights attorney continues to be propped by Russia Profile. See its weekly experts panel at http://www.russiaprofile.org
Also note how this human rights attorney has willingly appeared at La Russophobe. He wrongly accuses my work of having a “strong anti-Semitic flavor”, while not questioning the content at LR. Some of it which a good number of people consider as bigoted.
The “Two-Zero’s Diary (Moscow Blog)” hyperlink doesn’t seem to work.
One of the many problems with having more than a handful of 24-hour news services is that it errodes the quality of the news. There simply isn’t enough quality news to fill all hours of the day – so we are stuck with more and more of this speculative crap masquerading as “news”.
It is a classic case of expansion reducing quality. Like the NHL.
We should care about such erosion of quality content, because it makes even legitimate news topics more suspect. If they are willing to report such weak speculation as news – what else are they pushing on us that we haven’t caught onto yet? In their rush to fill every hour with something sounding important, their reporting judgment is brought into question.
On the other hand, NHL expansion has brought hockey to markets which would’ve otherwise not seen the sport at its best. With that expansion, came the influx of Europeans to the NHL which serves as a plus offset.
As for media, RTTV should have more than one in house analyst. It’s also clear that it would benefit from an in house trouble shooting generalist, who knows the American scene and won’t hold back from expressing what’s wrong.
Regarding media at large, I was pondering the idea of someone creating a Hard News Network (HNN).
this too weird for journalist to link just$100 dollar to a presiudent!!mr michael they emphasis they way russioans youth are thought to have united states as enemy number one which perpetrated by putin youth campaign (the nashi)russia as it is being still living on the soviet era COLD WAR!