Derek Francis said:CNN is not a balanced a news source. I'm checking the headlines right now.
We have:
"The slow motion implosion of the Republican Party"
"Ted Cruz is the real radical in this race"
"Trump's history of controversy with women"
I find PBS's Frontline usually fair.Derek Francis said:I agree with looking for numerous sources, but at the same time we want to avoid news media that revels in demagoguery. I want actual news and substance on issues. Not dirty laundry.
http://www.thechicagocouncil.org/sites/default/files/UkraineReport_February2015_FINAL.pdf
We face a critical juncture in Ukraine. There is no real ceasefire; indeed, there was a significant increase in fighting along the line of contact in eastern Ukraine in mid-January, with Russian/separatist forces launching attacks on the Donetsk airport and other areas. Instead of a political settlement, Moscow currently seeks to create a frozen conflict in eastern Ukraine as a means to pressure and destabilize the Ukrainian government.
Russians continue to be present in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in substantial numbers and have introduced significant amounts of heavy weapons. This could be preparation for another major Russian/separatist offensive.
Russian success would fatally undermine Ukraine’s stability and embolden the Kremlin to further challenge the security order in Europe. It might tempt President Putin to use his doctrine of protecting ethnic Russians and Russian speakers in seeking territorial changes elsewhere in the neighborhood, including in the Baltic States, provoking a direct challenge to NATO. Maintaining Western sanctions are critical but not by themselves sufficient. The West needs to bolster deterrence in Ukraine by raising the risks and costs to Russia of any renewed major offensive. That requires providing direct military assistance—in far larger amounts than provided to date and including lethal defensive arms—so that Ukraine is better able to defend itself. The U.S. government should provide
Ukraine $1 billion in military assistance as soon as ...
Okay, so who is this Ms Yaresko ? Where did she come from ?http://csis.org/ukraine/index.htm
March 22, 2016
Jaresko Declares Interest in Prime Minister Position
Ukrainian Finance Minister Natalia Yaresko today formalized her interest in becoming Ukraine’s next prime minister, after weeks of speculation naming her as a potential replacement for the embattled Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Ukraine has faced a political crisis in recent weeks after the departure of a number of parties from Yatsenyuk’s coalition in the Rada and the failure of inter-party talks to reach a mutually-agreeable resolution. Yaresko stated on Facebook that “only a technocratic government can deal with the problems in this of kind of [sic] political situation,” later stating that it is important that that government...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalie_Jaresko
Jaresko held several economics-related positions at the US Department of State in Washington, D.C., and eventually coordinated activities of the State Department, the Departments of Commerce, Treasury, the United States Trade Representative, and Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) in their economic relations with the Soviet Union and its successors. As part of her work she interacted with the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Later from 1992 to 1995, she was the first Chief of the Economic Section of the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, responsible for strengthening economic cooperation between the two countries.[8] In 2003 she was awarded the Ukrainian Order of Princess Olga for her contributions to the Ukrainian economy.[14][15]
Between 2005 and 2010 Jaresko was a member of President Viktor Yushchenko's Foreign Investors Advisory Council and the Advisory Board of the Ukrainian Center for Promotion of Foreign Investment under the auspices of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine.[14][15]
Jaresko also held several key positions in the private business sector. In February 2001 she became President and Chief Executive Officer of Western NIS Enterprise Fund (WNISEF). In 2006, she co-founded Horizon Capital, where she served as a Managing Partner and Chief Executive Officer. In those positions she established and strengthened economic ties with Ukraine and Moldova.[14][1
WSJ outside of the editorial page, same , I would say, with the NYT.Derek Francis said:Would you say BBC, Guardian, Economist, WSJ and Rueters are fairly balanced?
It's Democracynow.orgSophia said:democracynow.com
Their bias is leftish (each source has it's own bias). You can find there some events and statistics that are not usually covered by others. But I haven't visited their site for quite a long time.
This is all very reminiscent of the early 1950s, when I was a graduate student then. At that time, the U.S. had overwhelming power, and it was able to use the United Nations as a battering ram against its enemy, the Soviet Union, so Russia was, of course, vetoing lots of resolutions, condemning it. And leading anthropologists in the United States and England developed a—began to analyze why the Russians are so negative, what makes them say no at the United Nations all the time. And their proposal was that the Russians are negative because they raise their children in swaddling clothes, and that makes them negative. The three or four of us at Harvard who thought this ridiculous used to call it diaperology. That’s being re-enacted—a takeoff on Kremlinology. This is being re-enacted right now.
But the fact is, whatever you think about Putin—OK, irritable, rat-faced man with Asperger’s, whatever you like—the Russians have a case. And you have to understand the case. And the case is understood here by people who bother to think. So, for example, there was a lead article in Foreign Affairs, the main establishment journal, by John Mearsheimer with a title like something like "The West is Responsible for the Ukraine Crisis." And he was talking about the background. The background begins with the fall of the Soviet Union, 1989, 1990. There were negotiations between President Bush, James Baker and Mikhail Gorbachev about how to deal with the issues that arose at the time. A crucial question is: What happens to NATO? NATO had been advertised, since its beginning, as necessary to protect western Europe from the Russian hordes. OK, no more Russian hordes, so what happens to NATO?
Well, we know what happened to NATO. But the crucial issue was this. Gorbachev agreed to allow Germany, a unified Germany, to join NATO, a hostile military alliance. It’s a pretty remarkable concession, if you think about the history of the preceding century, half-century. Germany alone had practically destroyed Russia several times, and now he was agreeing to have Germany join a hostile military alliance led by the only superpower. But there was a quid pro quo, that Germany—that NATO would not move one inch to the east. That was the phrase that was used in the interchanges, meaning to East Germany. And on that condition, they went forward. NATO immediately moved to East Germany. When Gorbachev vigorously protested, naturally, he was informed by the United States that it was only a verbal commitment, it wasn’t on paper. The unstated implication is, if you are naïve enough to think you can make a gentlemen’s agreement with us, it’s your problem. They didn’t say that; I’m saying that. But NATO moved to East Germany; under Clinton, moved right up to Russia’s borders.
Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault
The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin
By John J. Mearsheimer
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/modal_forms/nojs/link-form/pdf/1113262
[/PLAIN]
Purchase Audio
According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine, as well as other countries in eastern Europe. In this view, the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 merely provided a pretext for Putin’s decision to order Russian forces to seize part of Ukraine.
But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 -- were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned
Log in or register for free to continue reading.
Thank you Jim,jim hardy said:It's Democracynow.org
and I'm glad you mentioned them. I like to watch Amy Goodman's TV show.
My David Stockman link above which suggested US meddling in Ukraine affairs was moderated out . Okay, fair enough LewRockwell is sort of out there, a 'postcards from the edge' blog if you will...
What i'd intended by it was to demonstrate that there is a point of view suggesting US is pushing Russia harder than i'd like. It doesn't make mainstream news.
Maybe the two links below will survive,
Here is Noam Chomsky's take, from an interview with Amy about this time last year:http://www.democracynow.org/2015/3/2/noam_chomsky_after_dangerous_proxy_warAt the time i thought "This is 1963 in reverse when Russia moved into Cuba and US objected strongly.
Here's the Mearsheimer article Chomsky referred to
www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-faultPerhaps I'm biased myself -
That old cold war movie "Bedfoerd Incident" imprinted me early on - its message was too much zeal is how hot wars get started.
I was still riding a bicycle during Cuban Missile Crisis . The rail yard west of Miami Airport filled with troop trains and flatcars with tanks. We kids rode our bikes out there to gawk and chat with the soldiers, thought it exciting. Our parents were scared half to death.
But back to subject of thread
Peruse the think tanks. Even they all have their leanings but the writing style is less hyperbolic than 'blogs from the edge.'
But it puts me to sleep. I have to come back to PF for refreshing conversation.
old jim
Sophia said:Though I am afraid this is not a place for such debate and it would be deleted if we continued.
jim hardy said:Yes you're right. Much of my post belongs in a different thread.
I do get ocd sometimes. Sorry.Interesting about the google bubble. I've taken to using Bing because i'd noticed google steers me toward really radical sites.
WWGD said:There is also Cuil : http://www.cuil.pt/
jim hardy said:entering Ukraine coup on cuil's page and clicking search
it returns a message "loading" and nothing more.
(Maybe it doesn't like Arkansas hillbillies?)
Does it work for you?
I got this: http://www.cuil.pt/r.php?cx=0028257...of=FORID:10&ie=UTF-8&q=ukraine+coup&sa=Searchjim hardy said:entering Ukraine coup on cuil's page and clicking search
it returns a message "loading" and nothing more.
(Maybe it doesn't like Arkansas hillbillies?)
Does it work for you?
Could you please post a link to your Cuil search results?Sophia said:it works fine for me. I'm really interested if it is really geographically censored
I got the same as youWWGD said:Could you please post a link to your Cuil search results?
That seems like a good sign; no filtering for geography at least.Sophia said:I got the same as you
WWGD said:
That's weird. maybe you could try one of those addons that change your IP address so that you appear to be in another country? I wonder if you would get the results thenjim hardy said:i get same "loading" message.
I'm not sure the country is the issue. I live in the US and got the same results as WWGD.Sophia said:That's weird. maybe you could try one of those addons that change your IP address so that you appear to be in another country? I wonder if you would get the results then
Dembadon said:I'm not sure the country is the issue. I live in the US and got the same results as WWGD.
Do you get the loading message for all search entries, Jim?
I have Windows 8.1 and use Chrome.Sophia said:Perhaps we can comapre our OS and web browsers?
I've got Linux Mint and use Firefox
I was suggesting a search engine to be able to pull one out of a bubble of results.Derek Francis said:Wait are we still on topic lol
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/10/17/npr-if-youre-just-joining-us-republicans-are-dangerously-extremistGROSS: Can you think of another time in American history when there have been as many people running for Congress who seem to be on the extreme?
(Socialist professor) WILENTZ: Not running for Congress, no. I mean even back in the '50s.
This is what I could find:jim hardy said:win7, firefox
tried turning off adblock.
tried in a private window
noticed my ghostery anti- tracker is blocking google analytics and google ajax search on the cuil page -
What ever are they doing over there? If the price of using Cuil's service is letting Google track me, i'll do without it.
meh - computers are just that way.
back to topic, sorry for digression(s)
