Saker, you always correctly label Zionist scum who currently rule so-called “West”. And I want to rise an important issue related to this. Lately I was surprised to notice that “Russia Insider” is censoring you.
I believe this shameful practice is unacceptable. This is a compromise with conscience. Compromise with evil. One cannot be at the same time on two sides – good and bad: “No man can serve two masters. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”
Saker, what is your take on it? Also it is important if they asked your permission for such censorship?
I don’t go there as often, or regularly (as I do Fortruss), as I used to after they removed several of my comments, after a while, in response to semi-trolling (I forget the subject — might have been on abortion — but I did leave a record on this blog, and it did seem to be that someone there just didn’t like my defending my views against another poster who was using ad hominen at me).
Now they have am annoying pop-up looking for funds on every screen which slows response significantly, and resulted in my computer crashing the other day.
It’s looking more like MSM these days — sort of western or fifth column, in some cases, and I’m a bit suspicious of them.
I’d rather give money to South Front, Fortruss, or here to Saker.
My thinking on this subject is that,just like in any group there is a wide range of opinions on something.Some are 100% committed to support “Russia,Novorossia,etc”.Others are 50-99% supporters,some maybe even less.But they all show some “support”.Even if its not to the standard I would like (and others as well).So I avoid litmus tests on support whenever I can.I’m happy with any support we get.My main “button issues” are with those that don’t support,and work actively against.
Charles Bausmann grew up with the journalism profession. If anybody knows what he is doing, it is he. If you don’t dine with the Devil, you will get nothing, absolutely nothing of importance accomplished on this planet. Even Mother Theresa knew that. Mother Theresa took donations from some pretty shady people. The Devil rules this planet and you have to play by his rules. So you can’t say “Zionist,” without it getting censored, so what, who cares? So throw out the baby with the bathwater? So throw out a perfectly good article over one emotionally charged inflammatory word? So pick up your ball and storm off in a huff? Just sayin’. (OMG, just sayin!!! Oh, no, pleease, no more air shows! No ho ho, no more air shows! Go, Air Force Falcons!!!! Kick Navy butt!!)
Besides, Russia Insider is really great at use of irony and sarcasm. How can you not guffaw at the sarcastic headlines? It is very entertaining. Rothschild and Rockefeller probably laugh their asses off reading it. They have a sense of humor too, even if they don’t like the content. If RI can make a successful business out of it, then more power to them.
For one thing, I have to question the intent of Bausman wanting to invest in Russian black earth farmland at ‘fire sale’ prices — to make a killing with it — and if that’s good for Russia.
As for dining with the Devil, one is know by the company he keeps.
Journalism profession? That’s where Tom Friedman, Rudolph Murdoch, and a bunch of other propagandists sit — Washington Post, NYT, the whole MSM is on the journalism profession, and it doesn’t mean any of them know what they are doing or have good intentions.
Storm off in huff? Why try to characterize not supporting a site by sending it money as such — it’s just making a judgement as to which sites and organizations are better or worse to support. But frankly, and honest journalist does not change the words of an article like that — it’s dishonest, and it means everything else they publish can’t be trusted.
‘Make a successful business out of it’… that’s not the point of journalism. It may be a necessary part of it in a capitalist culture, but it’s not the point of it, presents great dangers to the truth, and is not the purpose of various quality sites and outlets. That’s a very capitalist idea: as long as it’s a successful business then it’s OK — everything is to be measured in terms of business and profits, and if one dines with the Devil doing it that’s OK too.
Nope — not my way of thinking at all, and not what journalism is supposed to be about. Your post helps to clarify my concerns and objections to RI, and it’s profit oriented center.
Meaningless statement, and not exactly true either: I’ve read articles (slipped in?) there that included portraying Russia in an unjustified bad light, and some fifth column content. Some writers published do it fairly consistently. I don’t trust it, and I think I see a hidden, western capitalist investor agenda behind it (supporting Trump — another nasty capitalist?) — which can be found in various Russian media as well.
A lot of those NGOs look almost nice on the surface too, until one does a bit of digging and long term analysis.
There are better places to send your money to.
Russia Insider re-publishes a lot of Russia-bashing articles from MSM in order to showcase western media propaganda as an educational tool for the public to aid in critical thinking and to train readers to detect bias. That is a pretty unique and innovative approach to journalism for which Charles deserves some credit. He seems to be trying to teach people to read.
I’ve seen that stuff for decades and I don’t the likes of RI or a venture capitalist to teach me to read or know how propaganda works (which I’ve been doing for long before Bausman was born) — and those articles are just reprints that spread the garbage, which I can get by reading the MSM. Anyone here feel a need to be taught how to read, see propaganda, or think critically by Bausman?
Where does that explaining propaganda come in in that Trump article, where RI just give the guy favorable comments. Calling him a populist? Ridiculous! He doesn’t represent the common people. Would you feed someone poison to teach them it’s toxic and hurts them?
How does your ‘critical thinking’ come into your post? It’s doesn’t — you’re just making a lousy excuse for poor or biased journalism (or for Trump?) here.
But the Trump article is not the only example of this MSM nonsense — nor is RI the only western finance stuff found in Russian media. ‘Russian Insider’ sounds more to me like Bausman would like to be seen by investors, and buying media there is an old tactic which should be suspected. Call me cynical, but a lifetime of reading and seeing propaganda tends to make one like that.
I can also get good articles and writers elsewhere, of course, and there are a number of better sites which collect articles, as well as give original content. Why would I give money to RI instead of one the others?
One of the items is “3) A highly exaggerated anti-Russian bias in the western media has scared away many Western investors, making Russian assets more attractive. In fact, western investors in Russia have earned very high returns exactly because of this bias, which keeps capital away and gives higher returns to the capital that does come in.”
But he is pushing the idea that Russia is a place where investors (speculators) should put money (through his fund).
“As investors flee the dollar’s devaluation and the derivative market’s collapse, a flood of capital will pour into Russia to develop this sources of raw material (fear of investing in the US will far exceed any fears of investing in Russia by this point).”
And he talks about how undervalued Russian land is.
So he is trying to attract investors and saying that value is there — and will rise as anti-Russian propaganda is countered. How could he jelp that happen? Well — start a newspaper to put across the narrative which would be helpful to his investment fund.
That’s what I think I see — and not even a rocket scientist. But this is standard stuff in the capitalist west, advertising, public relations, and such. Create a publication to tell your side of a story, and call it news. Old hat.
Wondering why RI and Bausman the land speculator would give Trump the Real estate investor a soft shoe treatment? Professional courtesy? Maybe some business prospects?
A few news items:
“Despite investors’ cautiousness during the second quarter we did see
some encouraging signs for the market. For example, Austrian real estate
investor and developer Immofinanz will continue to invest in Russian
shopping centers, real estate tycoon Donald Trump has not abandoned
plans for business development in Russia, despite the political and
economic situation.”
“If Donald Trump – who despite his current lead in the polls, is still a longshot – manages to win the presidency, it would almost certainly spell an end to the absurd sanctioning and ‘isolation’ of Russia by the West. The reason? They’re bad for business. First, foremost, and above all, Donald Trump is a businessman – an entirely practical negotiator and dealmaker. As president, it is entirely likely that he would scrap the insane anti-Russia policies pursued by the incompetent Obama administration and usher in a new era of mutual cooperation. Could we expect anything less from the man behind The Art of the Deal?”
Not so long ago, the world-famous billionaire Donald Trump visited Russia. During the trip, he mentioned the idea of investing in the construction of a skyscraper in Moscow. The skyscraper will be similar to Trump Tower in New York. What is so exciting about the Moscow housing sector for Donald Trump? Didn’t he make a mistake when investing in Russia? Let’s ponder on these questions together…”
BTW — look at
Donald Trump Schools Whiny Brit – “Crimea is Your Problem, Not Ours” (Video)
America’s favorite populist says what’s on everyone’s mind but is ignored in the mainstream media. That is why people love him
[…]
America’s favorite populist? Populist real estate mogul worth $4 billion? This is image building, not populism. This isn’t Ron Paul, who is genuinely popular, or even the pseudo leftist, Bernie Sanders.
Why is RI pushing this guy?
“Washington (CNN) Republican frontrunner Donald Trump said Friday that the U.S. should only step in on Crimea if European countries ask for help and, until then, it remains “Europe’s problem.””
US should step in on Crimea under ANY circumstances? It’s part of Russia! If EU lap dogs say the US should get involved (meaning the US decides to get involved) then Trump thinks it’s OK?
He says it’s Europe’s problem — as if the whole Ukraine problems is not the result of US meddling. Is this guy for real? Does he understand anything? Is he really that much of an idiot? And RI publishes this with only comments supportive of Trump? Why?
It’s not irony, but lousy journalism — the piece goes on to say
“The Donald seems to have a knack for saying what the public wants, and he has been consistent in his position that kicking up a rumpus with Russia is dumb, and he would improve relations with Russia if elected.
If it wasn’t playing well among his supporters, he wouldn’t be keeping this up.”
His chances of being elected is irrelevant, even though his approval is now running about 1/3 among Republicans. But this is a puff piece for Trump, and for his improving relations — i.e. investment favorability for Russia land and building.
As for who will be president it’s not at all clear that it will be Bush, or a Republican. It’s rather early this kabuki yet. It doesn’t matter much since it’s just another player by the same theater producers. The problem with Trump is that he is not following the script and taking direction well.
The issue here, however is not the electoral farce, but the journalism and whether it’s worth sending money to RI. If they want to promote Russia as a good investment area that’s their business — although I think Russia is better without such speculators and ultimately foreign ownership of the commons, and taking control of it’s own farming land and real estate.
Many of the sanctions are actually beneficial for Russia in that it provides good reason to cut dependency on the west, but the issues are not the same: trading with the west does not depend on privatizing resources such as land, and certainly not on western investors owning capital in Russia — particularly when they make a ‘killing’ by buying up undervalued land at fire sale prices.
from http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/06/setting-up-fund-to-invest-in-russian.html
”
4) Because of subsidies, land in West is overpriced compared to developing world (Land in Russian is selling for less than one tenth the price it goes for in the US and Europe). When skyrocketing commodities increase farming’s profitable and Western governments run into budget problems as the dollar collapse, these subsidies are likely to be reduced, negating some of the benefit of owning agricultural land in those countries.
5) Russian agricultural land is enormously underpriced, even compared to countries without generous government subsidies. Compared the Average price of land in the
Average price of land:
A) US = $10,000 per ha (subsidized)
B) Europe = $20,000 per ha (subsidized)
C) Argentina and Brazil = $5000 per ha (not subsidized)
D) Russia = $500 – $1000 per ha (not subsidized)
”
Non-Russians taking advantage of that are effectively draining Russia money elsewhere, and attracting non_Russian investors Bausman’s fund does that. One can as easily sell produce from Russian owned land as from that owned by foreign investors, but the profits then go for Russia’s benefit. This foreign ownership is one of things the economic hit men and neolib vulture capitalists do, trying to control a country’s resources and make a killing instead of earning a reasonable ‘profit’ (although profits instead of earned income in themselves speak of exploitation — from owning the means of production rather than producing goods). This is the basis of speculation, increasing spread of wealth, monopoly, and growth of empire, and is the fundamental inherent flaw in capitalism and the distortions of so-called ‘free trade’.
BTW, it should be understood that the main point of the sanctions was not to hurt Russia directly, but as part of the policy to drive a wedge between Russia and the EU so as to drive the EU into the Arms of the US — which explains why more damage is done to the EU than to Russia by them.
Russians began to share satellite imagery in real time with their Syrian allies, he added. Russia has begun its military intervention in Syria and predicted that in the coming weeks thousands of Russian military personnel are set to touch down in Syria .
What really important has Russia Insider done instead of earning tens of thousands of dollars and news aggregation? Don’t they feel a shame?
So how can we help? Is it only a matter of donations, or do you need stuff like journalists, article writers, translaters, etc?
About censorship at “Russia Insider”
Saker, you always correctly label Zionist scum who currently rule so-called “West”. And I want to rise an important issue related to this. Lately I was surprised to notice that “Russia Insider” is censoring you.
As we all know, RI often republish Saker posts. In the post “What does Vladimir Putin’s 89% rating really mean?” “Russia Insider” removed word ‘Zionist‘ replacing it with ‘Empire‘ or ‘western’.
I believe this shameful practice is unacceptable. This is a compromise with conscience. Compromise with evil. One cannot be at the same time on two sides – good and bad: “No man can serve two masters. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”
Saker, what is your take on it? Also it is important if they asked your permission for such censorship?
I don’t go there as often, or regularly (as I do Fortruss), as I used to after they removed several of my comments, after a while, in response to semi-trolling (I forget the subject — might have been on abortion — but I did leave a record on this blog, and it did seem to be that someone there just didn’t like my defending my views against another poster who was using ad hominen at me).
Now they have am annoying pop-up looking for funds on every screen which slows response significantly, and resulted in my computer crashing the other day.
It’s looking more like MSM these days — sort of western or fifth column, in some cases, and I’m a bit suspicious of them.
I’d rather give money to South Front, Fortruss, or here to Saker.
They censored comments of mine as well. They’re completely infantile when it comes to opinions they don’t like. I wouldn’t give money to them.
Is this the Charles Bausman we’re talking about?
Yes — http://russia-insider.com/en/users/charles_bausman
Not at all the sort of venture capitalist person I want to give money to.
Russia Insider is weak, manipulative and sad.
FortRuss deserves support. RI deserves the boot.
The canoe paddle issues.
The use edited versions (I always go to the original if they post something from a primary source).
They ought to split the page in half. Crap on one side, the Truth or the Resistance on the other.
It’s okay if you are a whore. Just don’t pretend you pray for your johns and have some holiness about you.
My thinking on this subject is that,just like in any group there is a wide range of opinions on something.Some are 100% committed to support “Russia,Novorossia,etc”.Others are 50-99% supporters,some maybe even less.But they all show some “support”.Even if its not to the standard I would like (and others as well).So I avoid litmus tests on support whenever I can.I’m happy with any support we get.My main “button issues” are with those that don’t support,and work actively against.
Charles Bausmann grew up with the journalism profession. If anybody knows what he is doing, it is he. If you don’t dine with the Devil, you will get nothing, absolutely nothing of importance accomplished on this planet. Even Mother Theresa knew that. Mother Theresa took donations from some pretty shady people. The Devil rules this planet and you have to play by his rules. So you can’t say “Zionist,” without it getting censored, so what, who cares? So throw out the baby with the bathwater? So throw out a perfectly good article over one emotionally charged inflammatory word? So pick up your ball and storm off in a huff? Just sayin’. (OMG, just sayin!!! Oh, no, pleease, no more air shows! No ho ho, no more air shows! Go, Air Force Falcons!!!! Kick Navy butt!!)
Besides, Russia Insider is really great at use of irony and sarcasm. How can you not guffaw at the sarcastic headlines? It is very entertaining. Rothschild and Rockefeller probably laugh their asses off reading it. They have a sense of humor too, even if they don’t like the content. If RI can make a successful business out of it, then more power to them.
For one thing, I have to question the intent of Bausman wanting to invest in Russian black earth farmland at ‘fire sale’ prices — to make a killing with it — and if that’s good for Russia.
As for dining with the Devil, one is know by the company he keeps.
Journalism profession? That’s where Tom Friedman, Rudolph Murdoch, and a bunch of other propagandists sit — Washington Post, NYT, the whole MSM is on the journalism profession, and it doesn’t mean any of them know what they are doing or have good intentions.
Storm off in huff? Why try to characterize not supporting a site by sending it money as such — it’s just making a judgement as to which sites and organizations are better or worse to support. But frankly, and honest journalist does not change the words of an article like that — it’s dishonest, and it means everything else they publish can’t be trusted.
‘Make a successful business out of it’… that’s not the point of journalism. It may be a necessary part of it in a capitalist culture, but it’s not the point of it, presents great dangers to the truth, and is not the purpose of various quality sites and outlets. That’s a very capitalist idea: as long as it’s a successful business then it’s OK — everything is to be measured in terms of business and profits, and if one dines with the Devil doing it that’s OK too.
Nope — not my way of thinking at all, and not what journalism is supposed to be about. Your post helps to clarify my concerns and objections to RI, and it’s profit oriented center.
For everybody who is criticizing Russia Insider, remember this:
Russia Insider — it’s Russphobia free!
Meaningless statement, and not exactly true either: I’ve read articles (slipped in?) there that included portraying Russia in an unjustified bad light, and some fifth column content. Some writers published do it fairly consistently. I don’t trust it, and I think I see a hidden, western capitalist investor agenda behind it (supporting Trump — another nasty capitalist?) — which can be found in various Russian media as well.
A lot of those NGOs look almost nice on the surface too, until one does a bit of digging and long term analysis.
There are better places to send your money to.
Russia Insider re-publishes a lot of Russia-bashing articles from MSM in order to showcase western media propaganda as an educational tool for the public to aid in critical thinking and to train readers to detect bias. That is a pretty unique and innovative approach to journalism for which Charles deserves some credit. He seems to be trying to teach people to read.
I’ve seen that stuff for decades and I don’t the likes of RI or a venture capitalist to teach me to read or know how propaganda works (which I’ve been doing for long before Bausman was born) — and those articles are just reprints that spread the garbage, which I can get by reading the MSM. Anyone here feel a need to be taught how to read, see propaganda, or think critically by Bausman?
Where does that explaining propaganda come in in that Trump article, where RI just give the guy favorable comments. Calling him a populist? Ridiculous! He doesn’t represent the common people. Would you feed someone poison to teach them it’s toxic and hurts them?
How does your ‘critical thinking’ come into your post? It’s doesn’t — you’re just making a lousy excuse for poor or biased journalism (or for Trump?) here.
But the Trump article is not the only example of this MSM nonsense — nor is RI the only western finance stuff found in Russian media. ‘Russian Insider’ sounds more to me like Bausman would like to be seen by investors, and buying media there is an old tactic which should be suspected. Call me cynical, but a lifetime of reading and seeing propaganda tends to make one like that.
I can also get good articles and writers elsewhere, of course, and there are a number of better sites which collect articles, as well as give original content. Why would I give money to RI instead of one the others?
BTW — read http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/06/setting-up-fund-to-invest-in-russian.html
One of the items is “3) A highly exaggerated anti-Russian bias in the western media has scared away many Western investors, making Russian assets more attractive. In fact, western investors in Russia have earned very high returns exactly because of this bias, which keeps capital away and gives higher returns to the capital that does come in.”
But he is pushing the idea that Russia is a place where investors (speculators) should put money (through his fund).
“As investors flee the dollar’s devaluation and the derivative market’s collapse, a flood of capital will pour into Russia to develop this sources of raw material (fear of investing in the US will far exceed any fears of investing in Russia by this point).”
And he talks about how undervalued Russian land is.
So he is trying to attract investors and saying that value is there — and will rise as anti-Russian propaganda is countered. How could he jelp that happen? Well — start a newspaper to put across the narrative which would be helpful to his investment fund.
That’s what I think I see — and not even a rocket scientist. But this is standard stuff in the capitalist west, advertising, public relations, and such. Create a publication to tell your side of a story, and call it news. Old hat.
Wondering why RI and Bausman the land speculator would give Trump the Real estate investor a soft shoe treatment? Professional courtesy? Maybe some business prospects?
A few news items:
https://www.property-magazine.eu/russian-real-estate-investment-market-investors-continue-to-tread-carefully-28914.html
“Despite investors’ cautiousness during the second quarter we did see
some encouraging signs for the market. For example, Austrian real estate
investor and developer Immofinanz will continue to invest in Russian
shopping centers, real estate tycoon Donald Trump has not abandoned
plans for business development in Russia, despite the political and
economic situation.”
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/why-donald-trump-presidency-would-be-good-russia/ri8642
“If Donald Trump – who despite his current lead in the polls, is still a longshot – manages to win the presidency, it would almost certainly spell an end to the absurd sanctioning and ‘isolation’ of Russia by the West. The reason? They’re bad for business. First, foremost, and above all, Donald Trump is a businessman – an entirely practical negotiator and dealmaker. As president, it is entirely likely that he would scrap the insane anti-Russia policies pursued by the incompetent Obama administration and usher in a new era of mutual cooperation. Could we expect anything less from the man behind The Art of the Deal?”
http://www.profi-forex.us/news/entry4000005604.html
“Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:34:00 +0400
Not so long ago, the world-famous billionaire Donald Trump visited Russia. During the trip, he mentioned the idea of investing in the construction of a skyscraper in Moscow. The skyscraper will be similar to Trump Tower in New York. What is so exciting about the Moscow housing sector for Donald Trump? Didn’t he make a mistake when investing in Russia? Let’s ponder on these questions together…”
BTW — look at
Donald Trump Schools Whiny Brit – “Crimea is Your Problem, Not Ours” (Video)
America’s favorite populist says what’s on everyone’s mind but is ignored in the mainstream media. That is why people love him
[…]
America’s favorite populist? Populist real estate mogul worth $4 billion? This is image building, not populism. This isn’t Ron Paul, who is genuinely popular, or even the pseudo leftist, Bernie Sanders.
Why is RI pushing this guy?
“Washington (CNN) Republican frontrunner Donald Trump said Friday that the U.S. should only step in on Crimea if European countries ask for help and, until then, it remains “Europe’s problem.””
US should step in on Crimea under ANY circumstances? It’s part of Russia! If EU lap dogs say the US should get involved (meaning the US decides to get involved) then Trump thinks it’s OK?
He says it’s Europe’s problem — as if the whole Ukraine problems is not the result of US meddling. Is this guy for real? Does he understand anything? Is he really that much of an idiot? And RI publishes this with only comments supportive of Trump? Why?
“America’s favorite populist” is an example of use of irony. In any case, The Donald is irrelevant, because Bush will be president. It is his turn.
The link to that is http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/trump-crimea-europes-problem-why-should-us-allways-be-policeman-world/ri9118 BTW.
It’s not irony, but lousy journalism — the piece goes on to say
“The Donald seems to have a knack for saying what the public wants, and he has been consistent in his position that kicking up a rumpus with Russia is dumb, and he would improve relations with Russia if elected.
If it wasn’t playing well among his supporters, he wouldn’t be keeping this up.”
His chances of being elected is irrelevant, even though his approval is now running about 1/3 among Republicans. But this is a puff piece for Trump, and for his improving relations — i.e. investment favorability for Russia land and building.
As for who will be president it’s not at all clear that it will be Bush, or a Republican. It’s rather early this kabuki yet. It doesn’t matter much since it’s just another player by the same theater producers. The problem with Trump is that he is not following the script and taking direction well.
The issue here, however is not the electoral farce, but the journalism and whether it’s worth sending money to RI. If they want to promote Russia as a good investment area that’s their business — although I think Russia is better without such speculators and ultimately foreign ownership of the commons, and taking control of it’s own farming land and real estate.
My opinion is that the business crowd there ( http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:RC5uMJAZbBIJ:www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/expats-launch-new-site-to-defend-russia+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a#.fsGOL04ap and http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhimler/2015/03/10/russia-hacking-the-news/ ) can pay for their own venture. It should at least be clear what their agenda is.
In that case, all praise to Obama for sanctions.
Many of the sanctions are actually beneficial for Russia in that it provides good reason to cut dependency on the west, but the issues are not the same: trading with the west does not depend on privatizing resources such as land, and certainly not on western investors owning capital in Russia — particularly when they make a ‘killing’ by buying up undervalued land at fire sale prices.
from http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/06/setting-up-fund-to-invest-in-russian.html
”
4) Because of subsidies, land in West is overpriced compared to developing world (Land in Russian is selling for less than one tenth the price it goes for in the US and Europe). When skyrocketing commodities increase farming’s profitable and Western governments run into budget problems as the dollar collapse, these subsidies are likely to be reduced, negating some of the benefit of owning agricultural land in those countries.
5) Russian agricultural land is enormously underpriced, even compared to countries without generous government subsidies. Compared the Average price of land in the
Average price of land:
A) US = $10,000 per ha (subsidized)
B) Europe = $20,000 per ha (subsidized)
C) Argentina and Brazil = $5000 per ha (not subsidized)
D) Russia = $500 – $1000 per ha (not subsidized)
”
Non-Russians taking advantage of that are effectively draining Russia money elsewhere, and attracting non_Russian investors Bausman’s fund does that. One can as easily sell produce from Russian owned land as from that owned by foreign investors, but the profits then go for Russia’s benefit. This foreign ownership is one of things the economic hit men and neolib vulture capitalists do, trying to control a country’s resources and make a killing instead of earning a reasonable ‘profit’ (although profits instead of earned income in themselves speak of exploitation — from owning the means of production rather than producing goods). This is the basis of speculation, increasing spread of wealth, monopoly, and growth of empire, and is the fundamental inherent flaw in capitalism and the distortions of so-called ‘free trade’.
BTW, it should be understood that the main point of the sanctions was not to hurt Russia directly, but as part of the policy to drive a wedge between Russia and the EU so as to drive the EU into the Arms of the US — which explains why more damage is done to the EU than to Russia by them.
Russians began to share satellite imagery in real time with their Syrian allies, he added. Russia has begun its military intervention in Syria and predicted that in the coming weeks thousands of Russian military personnel are set to touch down in Syria .