Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, a referenda can give the best answer what people think. But it hasn't been held. All we have now is opinion polls.Yes, several hundred of thousands in Kiev + Soros money + Obama's administration made the coup possible in Ukraine.You said that it was a few hundred of thousands who made it possible for the Euromaidan to happen. The overthrowing of Yanukovich was possible because significant part of the country wanted that.What exactly did I say wrong?Bullshit, as usually.Who THEY?Obama's administration, Soros and a few hundred of thousands crowd in Kiev. But by that time Ukraine was a 40 million country. And basically, several thousands decided the fate of millions in Ukraine with the help of your enemies Obama's administration.They decided, kicked his ass out.
^ That is what you support. And that's what keeps harming your own president. It's time to realize it and to start playing in a right team for president, not in a wrong team against him, Toddster
Yanukovich had been despised by virtually a half of Ukraine since the very beginning (2004). And of course his internal and external policies afterwards didn't get him much support.
And yes, like you said significant part of the country wanted that (as well as significant part of the country wanted to be with Russia).
But significant is NOT yet majority. And since there was NO referendum about that we do NOT know if majority wanted it or not. Such serious swings in the future of the country should NOT be decided in the street, don't you think? If we decided to join Russia in the street, would you be ok with that? I'm afraid we both know the answer.
By the way, Crimeans have had a referendum and we know now the majority wanted reunification with Russia, over 90%. However Ukrainians keep whining about that and calling Crimea "a temporary occupied territory" this rejecting the will of people.
P.S. Also referendums resulted in 90% of vote is in favour of 'people's republics' in Donetsk and Luhansk (BBC)
Ukraine: pro-Russia separatists set for victory in eastern region referendum
and after that Kiev brought their tanks and started killing Ukrainian civilians there (blaming Putin for that).
Do you have an actual proof of your accusations or nothing but blah-blah?
You don't know what I'm talking about?
Pretending ignorance, or ignorant for real?
Yes, a referenda can give the best answer what people think. But it hasn't been held. All we have now is opinion polls.
About so called Crimean referendum. Personally I believe that majority of Crimeans would vote for becoming a part of Russia. But about the exact numbers I can't say. I don't believe Putin, his cronies and their referendum.
Absolutely.The media isn’t going to talk about Nazis in Ukraine because it’s George Soros, and his puppet Barack Hussein, who helped get them in power.
Do you have an actual proof of your accusations or nothing but blah-blah?
You don't know what I'm talking about?
Pretending ignorance, or ignorant for real?
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
Meanwhile let’s see what Stephen Cohen writes:
…for nearly a decade, the American media has so demonized Putin that we’ve lost sight of him, and we’ve obscured the possibilities that are there and that he’s offered to enhance, through some kind of steady, calm cooperation, American national security.…
Putin on the other hand has been an exceedingly successful national leader of Russia in foreign policy for 13 years.
The Real Reason the US Media Hates Vladimir Putin - Daily Reckoning
For nearly 10 years, mainstream press reporting, editorials and op-ed articles have increasingly portrayed Putin as a czar-like “autocrat,” or alternatively a “KGB thug,” who imposed a “rollback of democratic reforms” under way in Russia when he succeeded Boris Yeltsin as president in 2000. He installed instead a “venal regime” that has permitted “corruptionism,” encouraged the assassination of a “growing number” of journalists and carried out the “killing of political opponents.” Not infrequently, Putin is compared to Saddam Hussein and even Stalin.
but there is no evidence that any of these allegations against him are true, or at least entirely true. Most seem to have originated with Putin’s personal enemies, particularly Yeltsin-era oligarchs
The exceptionally vilifying charge that Putin has been behind the killing of political opponents focuses mainly on two victims – the investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was shot to death in Moscow in 2006; and a reputed KGB defector, Aleksandr Litvinenko, who died of radiation poisoning in London, also in 2006.
Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case.
Are U.S. policymakers aware of Putin’s extraordinary assistance to the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan after 9/11, his crucial help in supplying NATO troops now there or his support for harsher sanctions against Iran? Do they know that for these and other “pro-American” concessions he is viewed by many Russian national security officials as an “appeaser?”
Stop the pointless demonization of Putin
Unfortunately, we have a short memory and have already forgotten that after 9/11 Putin was the first who called Bush and said: “That was terrible. How can we help you guys?”
Then US went to war in Afghanistan to destroy Taliban and Putin helped US to get the victory in this war with minimum losses more than anybody else, even more than any NATO country.
Putin also shared his intelligence data with USA and so on and on. He was even criticized in Russia, so for a while he looked more like being pro-American leader, not even a bit anti-American.
Demonization of Putin is one of the biggest threats to American national security,Stephen Cohen.
And Putin warned CIA about Tsarnayev brothers who later were responsible for terror attack in Boston, but it’s not his fault CIA ignored his information.
OK, then where IS that All available evidence?Do you have an actual proof of your accusations or nothing but blah-blah?
You don't know what I'm talking about?
Pretending ignorance, or ignorant for real?
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
Meanwhile let’s see what Stephen Cohen writes:
…for nearly a decade, the American media has so demonized Putin that we’ve lost sight of him, and we’ve obscured the possibilities that are there and that he’s offered to enhance, through some kind of steady, calm cooperation, American national security.…
Putin on the other hand has been an exceedingly successful national leader of Russia in foreign policy for 13 years.
The Real Reason the US Media Hates Vladimir Putin - Daily Reckoning
For nearly 10 years, mainstream press reporting, editorials and op-ed articles have increasingly portrayed Putin as a czar-like “autocrat,” or alternatively a “KGB thug,” who imposed a “rollback of democratic reforms” under way in Russia when he succeeded Boris Yeltsin as president in 2000. He installed instead a “venal regime” that has permitted “corruptionism,” encouraged the assassination of a “growing number” of journalists and carried out the “killing of political opponents.” Not infrequently, Putin is compared to Saddam Hussein and even Stalin.
but there is no evidence that any of these allegations against him are true, or at least entirely true. Most seem to have originated with Putin’s personal enemies, particularly Yeltsin-era oligarchs
The exceptionally vilifying charge that Putin has been behind the killing of political opponents focuses mainly on two victims – the investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was shot to death in Moscow in 2006; and a reputed KGB defector, Aleksandr Litvinenko, who died of radiation poisoning in London, also in 2006.
Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case.
Are U.S. policymakers aware of Putin’s extraordinary assistance to the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan after 9/11, his crucial help in supplying NATO troops now there or his support for harsher sanctions against Iran? Do they know that for these and other “pro-American” concessions he is viewed by many Russian national security officials as an “appeaser?”
Stop the pointless demonization of Putin
Unfortunately, we have a short memory and have already forgotten that after 9/11 Putin was the first who called Bush and said: “That was terrible. How can we help you guys?”
Then US went to war in Afghanistan to destroy Taliban and Putin helped US to get the victory in this war with minimum losses more than anybody else, even more than any NATO country.
Putin also shared his intelligence data with USA and so on and on. He was even criticized in Russia, so for a while he looked more like being pro-American leader, not even a bit anti-American.
Demonization of Putin is one of the biggest threats to American national security,Stephen Cohen.
And Putin warned CIA about Tsarnayev brothers who later were responsible for terror attack in Boston, but it’s not his fault CIA ignored his information.
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
All available evidence points to Putin’s complicity in the 1999 apartment-building bombings in Russia. Those who have tried to investigate have been killed off, one by one.
I believe that Vladimir Putin came to power as the result of an act of terror committed against his own people. The evidence is overwhelming that the apartment-house bombings in 1999 in Moscow, Buinaksk, and Volgodonsk, which provided a pretext for the second Chechen war and catapulted Putin into the presidency, were carried out by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Yet, to this day, an indifferent world has made little attempt to grasp the significance of what was the greatest political provocation since the burning of the Reichstag.
I have been trying to call attention to the facts behind the bombings since 1999. I consider this a moral obligation, because ignoring the fact that a man in charge of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal came to power through an act of terror is highly dangerous in itself.
Russian human-rights defenders Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Anna Politkovskaya, and Alexander Litvinenko also worked to shed light on the apartment bombings. But all of them were murdered between 2003 and 2006. By 2007, when I testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the bombings, I was the only person publicly accusing the regime of responsibility who had not been killed.
The bombings terrorized Russia. The Russian authorities blamed Chechen rebels and thereby galvanized popular support for a new war in Chechnya. President Boris Yeltsin and his entourage were thoroughly hated for their role in the pillaging of the country. Putin, the head of the FSB, had just been named Yeltsin’s prime minister and achieved overnight popularity by vowing revenge against those who had murdered innocent civilians. He assumed direction of the war and, on the strength of initial successes, was elected president easily.
Almost from the start, however, there were doubts about the provenance of the bombings, which could not have been better calculated to rescue the fortunes of Yeltsin and his entourage. Suspicions deepened when a fifth bomb was discovered in the basement of a building in Ryazan, a city southeast of Moscow, and those who had placed it turned out to be not Chechen terrorists but agents of the FSB. After these agents were arrested by local police, Nikolai Patrushev, the head of the FSB, said that the bomb had been a fake and that it had been planted in Ryazan as part of a training exercise. The bomb, however, tested positive for hexogen, the explosive used in the four successful apartment bombings. An investigation of the Ryazan incident was published in the newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and the public’s misgivings grew so widespread that the FSB agreed to a televised meeting between its top officials and residents of the affected building. The FSB in this way tried to demonstrate its openness, but the meeting was a disaster: It left the overwhelming impression that the incident in Ryazan was a failed political provocation.
Three days after the broadcast, Putin was elected. Attention to the Ryazan incident faded, and it began to appear that the bombings would become just the latest in the long list of Russia’s unsolved crimes.
Vladimir Putin & 1999 Russian Apartment-House Bombings -- Was Putin Responsible? | National Review
Poor Putin. Always unfairly accused.
OK, then where IS that All available evidence?Do you have an actual proof of your accusations or nothing but blah-blah?
You don't know what I'm talking about?
Pretending ignorance, or ignorant for real?
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
Meanwhile let’s see what Stephen Cohen writes:
…for nearly a decade, the American media has so demonized Putin that we’ve lost sight of him, and we’ve obscured the possibilities that are there and that he’s offered to enhance, through some kind of steady, calm cooperation, American national security.…
Putin on the other hand has been an exceedingly successful national leader of Russia in foreign policy for 13 years.
The Real Reason the US Media Hates Vladimir Putin - Daily Reckoning
For nearly 10 years, mainstream press reporting, editorials and op-ed articles have increasingly portrayed Putin as a czar-like “autocrat,” or alternatively a “KGB thug,” who imposed a “rollback of democratic reforms” under way in Russia when he succeeded Boris Yeltsin as president in 2000. He installed instead a “venal regime” that has permitted “corruptionism,” encouraged the assassination of a “growing number” of journalists and carried out the “killing of political opponents.” Not infrequently, Putin is compared to Saddam Hussein and even Stalin.
but there is no evidence that any of these allegations against him are true, or at least entirely true. Most seem to have originated with Putin’s personal enemies, particularly Yeltsin-era oligarchs
The exceptionally vilifying charge that Putin has been behind the killing of political opponents focuses mainly on two victims – the investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was shot to death in Moscow in 2006; and a reputed KGB defector, Aleksandr Litvinenko, who died of radiation poisoning in London, also in 2006.
Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case.
Are U.S. policymakers aware of Putin’s extraordinary assistance to the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan after 9/11, his crucial help in supplying NATO troops now there or his support for harsher sanctions against Iran? Do they know that for these and other “pro-American” concessions he is viewed by many Russian national security officials as an “appeaser?”
Stop the pointless demonization of Putin
Unfortunately, we have a short memory and have already forgotten that after 9/11 Putin was the first who called Bush and said: “That was terrible. How can we help you guys?”
Then US went to war in Afghanistan to destroy Taliban and Putin helped US to get the victory in this war with minimum losses more than anybody else, even more than any NATO country.
Putin also shared his intelligence data with USA and so on and on. He was even criticized in Russia, so for a while he looked more like being pro-American leader, not even a bit anti-American.
Demonization of Putin is one of the biggest threats to American national security,Stephen Cohen.
And Putin warned CIA about Tsarnayev brothers who later were responsible for terror attack in Boston, but it’s not his fault CIA ignored his information.
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
All available evidence points to Putin’s complicity in the 1999 apartment-building bombings in Russia. Those who have tried to investigate have been killed off, one by one.
I believe that Vladimir Putin came to power as the result of an act of terror committed against his own people. The evidence is overwhelming that the apartment-house bombings in 1999 in Moscow, Buinaksk, and Volgodonsk, which provided a pretext for the second Chechen war and catapulted Putin into the presidency, were carried out by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Yet, to this day, an indifferent world has made little attempt to grasp the significance of what was the greatest political provocation since the burning of the Reichstag.
I have been trying to call attention to the facts behind the bombings since 1999. I consider this a moral obligation, because ignoring the fact that a man in charge of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal came to power through an act of terror is highly dangerous in itself.
Russian human-rights defenders Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Anna Politkovskaya, and Alexander Litvinenko also worked to shed light on the apartment bombings. But all of them were murdered between 2003 and 2006. By 2007, when I testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the bombings, I was the only person publicly accusing the regime of responsibility who had not been killed.
The bombings terrorized Russia. The Russian authorities blamed Chechen rebels and thereby galvanized popular support for a new war in Chechnya. President Boris Yeltsin and his entourage were thoroughly hated for their role in the pillaging of the country. Putin, the head of the FSB, had just been named Yeltsin’s prime minister and achieved overnight popularity by vowing revenge against those who had murdered innocent civilians. He assumed direction of the war and, on the strength of initial successes, was elected president easily.
Almost from the start, however, there were doubts about the provenance of the bombings, which could not have been better calculated to rescue the fortunes of Yeltsin and his entourage. Suspicions deepened when a fifth bomb was discovered in the basement of a building in Ryazan, a city southeast of Moscow, and those who had placed it turned out to be not Chechen terrorists but agents of the FSB. After these agents were arrested by local police, Nikolai Patrushev, the head of the FSB, said that the bomb had been a fake and that it had been planted in Ryazan as part of a training exercise. The bomb, however, tested positive for hexogen, the explosive used in the four successful apartment bombings. An investigation of the Ryazan incident was published in the newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and the public’s misgivings grew so widespread that the FSB agreed to a televised meeting between its top officials and residents of the affected building. The FSB in this way tried to demonstrate its openness, but the meeting was a disaster: It left the overwhelming impression that the incident in Ryazan was a failed political provocation.
Three days after the broadcast, Putin was elected. Attention to the Ryazan incident faded, and it began to appear that the bombings would become just the latest in the long list of Russia’s unsolved crimes.
Vladimir Putin & 1999 Russian Apartment-House Bombings -- Was Putin Responsible? | National Review
Poor Putin. Always unfairly accused.
Except of "Putin was elected in 3 days" and some people were murdered. Nobody could murder them and blow up the building except for Putin? Nobody could kill those people but Putin? What a nonsense. Putin was already popular enough among Russians that's why he was elected.
Read what Cohen said (in my previous post, including Litvinenko mentioned in your article) : Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case.
You better tell me why Bush blew up the Twin Towers to invade Iraq. There are many articles about that on the Internet about that too. Shall we believe them too?
TheGuardian:
federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, or took no action to stop them, "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East".
Who really blew up the twin towers?
OK, then where IS that All available evidence?Do you have an actual proof of your accusations or nothing but blah-blah?
You don't know what I'm talking about?
Pretending ignorance, or ignorant for real?
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
Meanwhile let’s see what Stephen Cohen writes:
…for nearly a decade, the American media has so demonized Putin that we’ve lost sight of him, and we’ve obscured the possibilities that are there and that he’s offered to enhance, through some kind of steady, calm cooperation, American national security.…
Putin on the other hand has been an exceedingly successful national leader of Russia in foreign policy for 13 years.
The Real Reason the US Media Hates Vladimir Putin - Daily Reckoning
For nearly 10 years, mainstream press reporting, editorials and op-ed articles have increasingly portrayed Putin as a czar-like “autocrat,” or alternatively a “KGB thug,” who imposed a “rollback of democratic reforms” under way in Russia when he succeeded Boris Yeltsin as president in 2000. He installed instead a “venal regime” that has permitted “corruptionism,” encouraged the assassination of a “growing number” of journalists and carried out the “killing of political opponents.” Not infrequently, Putin is compared to Saddam Hussein and even Stalin.
but there is no evidence that any of these allegations against him are true, or at least entirely true. Most seem to have originated with Putin’s personal enemies, particularly Yeltsin-era oligarchs
The exceptionally vilifying charge that Putin has been behind the killing of political opponents focuses mainly on two victims – the investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who was shot to death in Moscow in 2006; and a reputed KGB defector, Aleksandr Litvinenko, who died of radiation poisoning in London, also in 2006.
Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case.
Are U.S. policymakers aware of Putin’s extraordinary assistance to the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan after 9/11, his crucial help in supplying NATO troops now there or his support for harsher sanctions against Iran? Do they know that for these and other “pro-American” concessions he is viewed by many Russian national security officials as an “appeaser?”
Stop the pointless demonization of Putin
Unfortunately, we have a short memory and have already forgotten that after 9/11 Putin was the first who called Bush and said: “That was terrible. How can we help you guys?”
Then US went to war in Afghanistan to destroy Taliban and Putin helped US to get the victory in this war with minimum losses more than anybody else, even more than any NATO country.
Putin also shared his intelligence data with USA and so on and on. He was even criticized in Russia, so for a while he looked more like being pro-American leader, not even a bit anti-American.
Demonization of Putin is one of the biggest threats to American national security,Stephen Cohen.
And Putin warned CIA about Tsarnayev brothers who later were responsible for terror attack in Boston, but it’s not his fault CIA ignored his information.
Yes, I do know what you’re talking about: it’s called absurd. And also I know you don’t have anything to prove it.
All available evidence points to Putin’s complicity in the 1999 apartment-building bombings in Russia. Those who have tried to investigate have been killed off, one by one.
I believe that Vladimir Putin came to power as the result of an act of terror committed against his own people. The evidence is overwhelming that the apartment-house bombings in 1999 in Moscow, Buinaksk, and Volgodonsk, which provided a pretext for the second Chechen war and catapulted Putin into the presidency, were carried out by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Yet, to this day, an indifferent world has made little attempt to grasp the significance of what was the greatest political provocation since the burning of the Reichstag.
I have been trying to call attention to the facts behind the bombings since 1999. I consider this a moral obligation, because ignoring the fact that a man in charge of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal came to power through an act of terror is highly dangerous in itself.
Russian human-rights defenders Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Anna Politkovskaya, and Alexander Litvinenko also worked to shed light on the apartment bombings. But all of them were murdered between 2003 and 2006. By 2007, when I testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the bombings, I was the only person publicly accusing the regime of responsibility who had not been killed.
The bombings terrorized Russia. The Russian authorities blamed Chechen rebels and thereby galvanized popular support for a new war in Chechnya. President Boris Yeltsin and his entourage were thoroughly hated for their role in the pillaging of the country. Putin, the head of the FSB, had just been named Yeltsin’s prime minister and achieved overnight popularity by vowing revenge against those who had murdered innocent civilians. He assumed direction of the war and, on the strength of initial successes, was elected president easily.
Almost from the start, however, there were doubts about the provenance of the bombings, which could not have been better calculated to rescue the fortunes of Yeltsin and his entourage. Suspicions deepened when a fifth bomb was discovered in the basement of a building in Ryazan, a city southeast of Moscow, and those who had placed it turned out to be not Chechen terrorists but agents of the FSB. After these agents were arrested by local police, Nikolai Patrushev, the head of the FSB, said that the bomb had been a fake and that it had been planted in Ryazan as part of a training exercise. The bomb, however, tested positive for hexogen, the explosive used in the four successful apartment bombings. An investigation of the Ryazan incident was published in the newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and the public’s misgivings grew so widespread that the FSB agreed to a televised meeting between its top officials and residents of the affected building. The FSB in this way tried to demonstrate its openness, but the meeting was a disaster: It left the overwhelming impression that the incident in Ryazan was a failed political provocation.
Three days after the broadcast, Putin was elected. Attention to the Ryazan incident faded, and it began to appear that the bombings would become just the latest in the long list of Russia’s unsolved crimes.
Vladimir Putin & 1999 Russian Apartment-House Bombings -- Was Putin Responsible? | National Review
Poor Putin. Always unfairly accused.
Except of "Putin was elected in 3 days" and some people were murdered. Nobody could murder them and blow up the building except for Putin? Nobody could kill those people but Putin? What a nonsense. Putin was already popular enough among Russians that's why he was elected.
Read what Cohen said (in my previous post, including Litvinenko mentioned in your article) : Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case.
You better tell me why Bush blew up the Twin Towers to invade Iraq. There are many articles about that on the Internet about that too. Shall we believe them too?
TheGuardian:
federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, or took no action to stop them, "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East".
Who really blew up the twin towers?
Who caught those FSB agents? Where is the evidence? Just hateful blah-blah. Read Cohen again: Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case. And that can be response to your other post. You are stuck in your hateful world carefully created for you by not only Putin's enemies but also the enemies of your own country and your own president.OK, then where IS that All available evidence?
Catching the FSB agents planting the bomb wasn't enough for you? LOL!
Poor pooty Poot, eh comrade?
Who caught those FSB agents? Where is the evidence? Just hateful blah-blah. Read Cohen again: Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case. And that can be response to your other post. You are stuck in your hateful world carefully created for you by not only Putin's enemies but also the enemies of your own country and your own president.OK, then where IS that All available evidence?
Catching the FSB agents planting the bomb wasn't enough for you? LOL!
Poor pooty Poot, eh comrade?
Meanwhile there are several key statements in the article which contradict facts, logic and common sense. Here are the facts:
- In 1999 Putin was a PM and Yeltsin was a president. The next elections were scheduled for March, while the terror attacks have happened in September 1999, just within a month after Putin became a PM (4+ months before the elections, not 3 days!).
- If I want to be a president I would rather try to show my electorate I can keep the country safe and blowing up the apartments can only hurt me, but will NOT help me to become a president (at least in Russia). Another reason to believe it was done by radical Muslims since Putin’s first visit was to Chechnya in August 1999 trying to clean that Muslim mess.
- The population of both cities where the apartments were blown up is about 230 hundred. The population of Russia is more than 144 million. How 230 hundred (including the children who don’t vote) can affect the result of elections?
- Putin was elected a president 4 times, not only after those apartments were blown up.
On 9 August 1999, Vladimir Putin was appointed one of three First Deputy Prime Ministers, by President Boris Yeltsin.
On 31 December 1999, Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned and, according to the constitution, Putin became Acting President of the Russian Federation.
Yeltsin's resignation resulted in the Presidential elections being held within three months, on 26 March 2000; Putin won in the first round with 53% of the vote
On 14 March 2004, Putin was elected to the presidency for a second term, receiving 71% of the vote
On 4 March 2012, Putin won the 2012 Russian presidential elections in the first round, with 63.6% of the vote.
On 18 March 2018, Putin won the 2018 presidential election in the first round, with 76% of the vote
Political career of Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia
Buynaksk is a town in the Republic of Dagestan, Population: 62,623
Buynaksk - Wikipedia
Volgodonsk is a city in Rostov Oblast, Population: 170,841
Volgodonsk - Wikipedia
the population of Russia is 144,438,554 excluding Crimea and Sevastopol
Demographics of Russia - Wikipedia
P.S. Will you ever comment blowing Twin Towers?
If somebody write something on the Internet i not enough to be considered an evidence. Otherwise Trump is a traitor, an idiot and a Putin's asset.Who caught those FSB agents? Where is the evidence? Just hateful blah-blah. Read Cohen again: Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case. And that can be response to your other post. You are stuck in your hateful world carefully created for you by not only Putin's enemies but also the enemies of your own country and your own president.OK, then where IS that All available evidence?
Catching the FSB agents planting the bomb wasn't enough for you? LOL!
Poor pooty Poot, eh comrade?
Meanwhile there are several key statements in the article which contradict facts, logic and common sense. Here are the facts:
- In 1999 Putin was a PM and Yeltsin was a president. The next elections were scheduled for March, while the terror attacks have happened in September 1999, just within a month after Putin became a PM (4+ months before the elections, not 3 days!).
- If I want to be a president I would rather try to show my electorate I can keep the country safe and blowing up the apartments can only hurt me, but will NOT help me to become a president (at least in Russia). Another reason to believe it was done by radical Muslims since Putin’s first visit was to Chechnya in August 1999 trying to clean that Muslim mess.
- The population of both cities where the apartments were blown up is about 230 hundred. The population of Russia is more than 144 million. How 230 hundred (including the children who don’t vote) can affect the result of elections?
- Putin was elected a president 4 times, not only after those apartments were blown up.
On 9 August 1999, Vladimir Putin was appointed one of three First Deputy Prime Ministers, by President Boris Yeltsin.
On 31 December 1999, Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned and, according to the constitution, Putin became Acting President of the Russian Federation.
Yeltsin's resignation resulted in the Presidential elections being held within three months, on 26 March 2000; Putin won in the first round with 53% of the vote
On 14 March 2004, Putin was elected to the presidency for a second term, receiving 71% of the vote
On 4 March 2012, Putin won the 2012 Russian presidential elections in the first round, with 63.6% of the vote.
On 18 March 2018, Putin won the 2018 presidential election in the first round, with 76% of the vote
Political career of Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia
Buynaksk is a town in the Republic of Dagestan, Population: 62,623
Buynaksk - Wikipedia
Volgodonsk is a city in Rostov Oblast, Population: 170,841
Volgodonsk - Wikipedia
the population of Russia is 144,438,554 excluding Crimea and Sevastopol
Demographics of Russia - Wikipedia
P.S. Will you ever comment blowing Twin Towers?
Who caught those FSB agents? Where is the evidence?
After these agents were arrested by local police, Nikolai Patrushev, the head of the FSB, said that the bomb had been a fake and that it had been planted in Ryazan as part of a training exercise. The bomb, however, tested positive for hexogen, the explosive used in the four successful apartment bombings. An investigation of the Ryazan incident was published in the newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and the public’s misgivings grew so widespread that the FSB agreed to a televised meeting between its top officials and residents of the affected building. The FSB in this way tried to demonstrate its openness, but the meeting was a disaster: It left the overwhelming impression that the incident in Ryazan was a failed political provocation.
If I want to be a president I would rather try to show my electorate I can keep the country safe and blowing up the apartments can only hurt me, but will NOT help me to become a president
"Elect me, I'll make those Chechens pay for blowing up our buildings and killing our people"
If somebody write something on the Internet i not enough to be considered an evidence. Otherwise Trump is a traitor, an idiot and a Putin's asset.Who caught those FSB agents? Where is the evidence? Just hateful blah-blah. Read Cohen again: Not a shred of evidence or an element of logic points to Putin in either case. And that can be response to your other post. You are stuck in your hateful world carefully created for you by not only Putin's enemies but also the enemies of your own country and your own president.OK, then where IS that All available evidence?
Catching the FSB agents planting the bomb wasn't enough for you? LOL!
Poor pooty Poot, eh comrade?
Meanwhile there are several key statements in the article which contradict facts, logic and common sense. Here are the facts:
- In 1999 Putin was a PM and Yeltsin was a president. The next elections were scheduled for March, while the terror attacks have happened in September 1999, just within a month after Putin became a PM (4+ months before the elections, not 3 days!).
- If I want to be a president I would rather try to show my electorate I can keep the country safe and blowing up the apartments can only hurt me, but will NOT help me to become a president (at least in Russia). Another reason to believe it was done by radical Muslims since Putin’s first visit was to Chechnya in August 1999 trying to clean that Muslim mess.
- The population of both cities where the apartments were blown up is about 230 hundred. The population of Russia is more than 144 million. How 230 hundred (including the children who don’t vote) can affect the result of elections?
- Putin was elected a president 4 times, not only after those apartments were blown up.
On 9 August 1999, Vladimir Putin was appointed one of three First Deputy Prime Ministers, by President Boris Yeltsin.
On 31 December 1999, Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned and, according to the constitution, Putin became Acting President of the Russian Federation.
Yeltsin's resignation resulted in the Presidential elections being held within three months, on 26 March 2000; Putin won in the first round with 53% of the vote
On 14 March 2004, Putin was elected to the presidency for a second term, receiving 71% of the vote
On 4 March 2012, Putin won the 2012 Russian presidential elections in the first round, with 63.6% of the vote.
On 18 March 2018, Putin won the 2018 presidential election in the first round, with 76% of the vote
Political career of Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia
Buynaksk is a town in the Republic of Dagestan, Population: 62,623
Buynaksk - Wikipedia
Volgodonsk is a city in Rostov Oblast, Population: 170,841
Volgodonsk - Wikipedia
the population of Russia is 144,438,554 excluding Crimea and Sevastopol
Demographics of Russia - Wikipedia
P.S. Will you ever comment blowing Twin Towers?
Who caught those FSB agents? Where is the evidence?
After these agents were arrested by local police, Nikolai Patrushev, the head of the FSB, said that the bomb had been a fake and that it had been planted in Ryazan as part of a training exercise. The bomb, however, tested positive for hexogen, the explosive used in the four successful apartment bombings. An investigation of the Ryazan incident was published in the newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and the public’s misgivings grew so widespread that the FSB agreed to a televised meeting between its top officials and residents of the affected building. The FSB in this way tried to demonstrate its openness, but the meeting was a disaster: It left the overwhelming impression that the incident in Ryazan was a failed political provocation.
If I want to be a president I would rather try to show my electorate I can keep the country safe and blowing up the apartments can only hurt me, but will NOT help me to become a president
"Elect me, I'll make those Chechens pay for blowing up our buildings and killing our people"
The President Is A Traitor
www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-traitor-anthony-scaramucci-cnn_n_5d97d8dae4b0fc935eda2dd3
The Traitors Among Us
Amazon.com: trump is an idiot
If you Google the word “idiot” the image of Donald Trump comes up.
... and tons of articles like that. Do you believe them? I don't think so. What makes you believe articles about Putin then?
P.S. When shall we see your comments on articles about blowing Twin Towers to invade Iraq? There are many of them on the Internet.
Shall we believe them as well?
And that's your only comment? That's what I thought. Stay in your hateful hole rejecting the truth. Just like liberals, they hate Russia too. But guess what: your president does NOT.Don't put any polonium in my tea...…...
I never said that the polls are ideal source of information. But we have only them about this matter.Yes, a referenda can give the best answer what people think. But it hasn't been held. All we have now is opinion polls.
About so called Crimean referendum. Personally I believe that majority of Crimeans would vote for becoming a part of Russia. But about the exact numbers I can't say. I don't believe Putin, his cronies and their referendum.
According to the polls Mrs. Clinton is a president of USA and the NY morning newspapers the day after elections had her pictures and headlines “Congratulations. Madame President!” And we all know what happened.
BTW, replying your previous post, I’d like to post what Stephen Cohen thinks about the coup in “independent” Ukraine.
The American media coverage of Ukraine is wrong and inflammatory from beginning to end.
Why did the European Union tell the democratically elected president of such a profoundly divided country, two Ukraines, in November, that he must decide either/or, you’re either with Europe, or you’re with Russia? That’s a provocation, and that’s where this began. And here’s what’s not reported.
Cohen referred to the leaked conversation between the top State Department official Victoria Nuland and the US ambassador in Kiev, in which she dismissed the EU with the F-word, as further proof that the US wants a new anti-Russian Ukrainian government and is prepared to participate in a coup to achieve that end:
Stop and think how that story was covered in the American media. The first lead was oh my gosh, she said F the EU. The second lead was who leaked this story? Oh, it must’ve been the Russians. Look at those horrible Russians. But that wasn’t the story. The story is what the top State Department official said to the American ambassador in Kiev.
And what she said is you and I are empowered to form a new Ukrainian government. And they’re actually discussing who should be in this government. And the new government is going to get rid of the democratically elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych.
Now we may hate Yanukovych. He may be a rat of the first magnitude. But in plain language, they were plotting a coup d’etat against a democratically elected president. And we know that in countries with fragile democratic traditions, when you overthrow an elected president, you are setting back democracy maybe decades [emphasis added].
Details at:
The Real Reason the US Media Hates Vladimir Putin - Daily Reckoning
I don't know about the majority of Ukraine (Ukrainian officials never had balls to hold any referendum to get the real numbers), But the majority of Eastern Ukraine - for sure.Likewise, you can't claim that majority of Ukraine wanted integration with Russia.
And that's your only comment? That's what I thought. Stay in your hateful hole rejecting the truth. Just like liberals, they hate Russia too. But guess what: your president does NOT.Don't put any polonium in my tea...…...
Actually, it is not about the balls. The reason of not holding the referendum is clear.I don't know about the majority of Ukraine (Ukrainian officials never had balls to hold any referendum to get the real numbers), But the majority of Eastern Ukraine - for sure.Likewise, you can't claim that majority of Ukraine wanted integration with Russia.
Yes but too late now, Should have been done before the coup in 2914 when Crimea and Donbass were still in Ukraine.Actually, it is not about the balls. The reason of not holding the referendum is clear.I don't know about the majority of Ukraine (Ukrainian officials never had balls to hold any referendum to get the real numbers), But the majority of Eastern Ukraine - for sure.Likewise, you can't claim that majority of Ukraine wanted integration with Russia.
The referendum should be held on the entire territory of Ukraine. And the result should be taken in consideration on all-Ukrainian scale. And all regions of Ukraine should accept this and agree with the majority.
As was the case with the referendum in the UK. There were regions which voted to remain but that didn't mean that they automatically break with the UK and stay in the EU.
The Ukrainian authorities rightfully decided that the results in some regions could be used by some forces to try to divide Ukraine.
Yes but too late now, Should have been done before the coup in 2914 when Crimea and Donbass were still in Ukraine.Actually, it is not about the balls. The reason of not holding the referendum is clear.I don't know about the majority of Ukraine (Ukrainian officials never had balls to hold any referendum to get the real numbers), But the majority of Eastern Ukraine - for sure.Likewise, you can't claim that majority of Ukraine wanted integration with Russia.
The referendum should be held on the entire territory of Ukraine. And the result should be taken in consideration on all-Ukrainian scale. And all regions of Ukraine should accept this and agree with the majority.
As was the case with the referendum in the UK. There were regions which voted to remain but that didn't mean that they automatically break with the UK and stay in the EU.
The Ukrainian authorities rightfully decided that the results in some regions could be used by some forces to try to divide Ukraine.
Besides, with all those Nazis controlling everything (even the president's will to cooperate with the people in Donbass) it's not possible.
