United States, Russia & Pravda

A Trivial Technique of Psychological pressure

"Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, openly criticized the Russian government in connection with the gas conflict with Ukraine. Ms. Rice used quite a trivial technique of psychological pressure, which is mostly practiced in the field of education. According to Condoleezza Rice, Russia's actions towards Ukraine did not characterize it as a respectable member of the Group of Eight. The statement from the high-ranking US official sounded like a reprimand from a strict babysitter that was teaching its baby to behave. It goes without saying that the largest Eurasian power is not a baby"

Some Questions for Condoleezza Rice

The Bush regime has certainly had its problems with its Secretaries of State. The first one, Colin Powell, lied through his teeth at the United Nations Security Council and this one, Condoleezza Rice, has an acute case of chronic insolence ... Maybe Condoleezza Rice would like to answer these questions before she vents her spleen the next time. We include the answers in brackets should she wish to consult, for we know her grasp of international affairs is almost as weak as her boss's..."
 

A Trivial Technique of Psychological pressure, Yaroslava Krestovskaya in the Russian Pravda, 11 January 2006

Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, openly criticized the Russian government in connection with the gas conflict with Ukraine. Ms. Rice used quite a trivial technique of psychological pressure, which is mostly practiced in the field of education. According to Condoleezza Rice, Russia's actions towards Ukraine did not characterize it as a respectable member of the Group of Eight. The statement from the high-ranking US official sounded like a reprimand from a strict babysitter that was teaching its baby to behave.

It goes without saying that the largest Eurasian power is not a baby. In addition, the geopolitical system in the world has undergone dramatic changes since the 1990s. The US Secretary of State, however, has seemingly lost the sense of time and reality. Ms. Rice's wish to exercise her political power became a surprise for both the Russian Ministry for Foreign Affairs and proponents of traditional liberal values.

Ms. Rice's criticism can be explained with the politician's personal peculiarities. Why is Condoleezza Rice so fond of her “strict teacher” role? Is it her technique that she follows to stay in the center of political attention? The leader of the Liberal and Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR), Vladimir Zhirinovsky, expressed his opinion on the matter in an exclusive interview with Pravda.Ru.

”Condoleezza Rice released a coarse anti-Russian statement... Ms. Rice was always interested in Russia. Now she needs to prove that she does have a certain amount of knowledge about Russia. Her goal number one is to observe USA's interest. If Russia rises, it means that the USA falls down. Europe has united, China is growing speedily and Russia possesses immense power in terms of fuel resources. The US administration cannot do anything about it.

”The USA experiences the crisis of ideological and moral values. Americans try to talk about positive family values, although the actual state of things is disastrous... The civilized world needs to think about a decision when single politicians are not allowed to stay in power. This was a common practice in the Soviet political system. The matter of international relations is very subtle and exquisite. One single word or phrase may play an extremely important role in politics...

Some Questions for Condoleezza Rice, Pravda, 13 January 2006

The Bush regime has certainly had its problems with its Secretaries of State. The first one, Colin Powell, lied through his teeth at the United Nations Security Council and this one, Condoleezza Rice, has an acute case of chronic insolence where Russia is concerned.

Every so often, Condoleezza Rice has an attack of fury, which seems more like a temper tantrum from some spoilt six-year-old brat in need of a good hiding. Yet again she makes some manic and unfounded statements about Russia and democracy – the old cassette we hear from time to time, which these days makes everyone shrug their shoulders, shake their heads and say “there she goes again, poor woman.”

Maybe Condoleezza Rice would like to answer these questions before she vents her spleen the next time. We include the answers in brackets should she wish to consult, for we know her grasp of international affairs is almost as weak as her boss's.

Were the last two electoral processes in Russia transparent? (Yes)
Could one say the same about the two elections of Bush and his regime? (No)

Did Russia invade Iraq illegally? (No).
Did the United States of America invade Iraq, a sovereign nation, without a casus belli? (Yes).

Did the USA decide to follow its obligations under the UN Charter? (No)
Did Russia insist on using the norms of international law for crisis management? (Yes)

Has the Bush regime broken practically every international law in recent history regarding crisis management? (Yes)
Has Moscow systematically underlined the need for a multilateral and democratic process to crisis management? (Yes)

Has the Bush regime been responsible for an act of wanton slaughter in Iraq? (Yes)
Has Russia been involved in this horrific and criminal act of butchery? (No)

Did the USA claim that Iraq had WMD? (Yes)
Did Iraq have WMD? (No)
Did the US authorities claim they knew where the WMD was? (Yes)
Did they in fact know what they were talking about? (No)
Has the USA systematically lied in questions related with its foreign policy? (Yes)
Has Russia been persistent and coherent in presenting a balanced version of the truth, referring all decisions on crisis management to the UNO? (Yes)

Did the USA practice debate, dialogue, discussion and democracy in its crisis management during the period of the Bush regime? (No)
Has Russia been the one to press for these democratic principles in international relations? (Yes)

Did the US authorities practise torture on a systematic scale during the Bush regime? (Yes)
Has Russia practised torture? (No)

Is there a death penalty in the USA? (Yes)
And in Russia? (No)

Does the USA have concentration camps strewn halfway across the globe, where medieval style torture chambers exist and are used? (Yes)
Does Russia have concentration camps? (No)

Has the USA been guilty of kidnapping and holding prople for four years without trial or even charges being brought? (Yes)
Did the USA release British prisoners from Guantanamo arbitrarily because Tony Blair had a quiet word with Bush? (Yes)
Does Russia kidnap people or hold prisoners in concentration camps? (No)

Should Condoleezza Rice therefore mind what she says next time around? Yes, because nobody asked for her self-opinionated, insolent and arrogant points of view, nobody cares anyway and every time this ludicrous figutre opens her mouth, she crosses the line dividing the sublime from the ridiculous.

Now for some more questions for Condoleezza Rice to answer:

Does Condoleezza Rice think it is OK for US soldiers to urinate on prisoners?
Does she think it is “democratic” to sodomise them?
What does she think of Lynndie England's “playing around” at the Abu ghraib concentration camp?
Does she think it is a good idea to defecate in prisoners’ food?
How about wiring up their testicles with electrodes?
And depriving them of sleep?
And subjecting people to mental, physical, religious and sexual abuse?

Has Russia done any of these things?
And the gool ol' US of A?