Da Da That’s Putin, Lover Of The Russian Queens


The BBC seem quite relaxed about Putin’s little invasion….can’t remember them asking this about any of Israel’s little incursions:

Ukraine crisis: Does Russia have a case?


The BBC makes a lot of the status of ‘ethnic Russians’ inside the Ukraine….wouldn’t they be Ukrainian then?

The BBC always reassures us that Muslims are even more British than the British..as of course are all immigrants to this country who can’t wait to wrap themselves in the Union Flag.

How is that different for these ‘Russians’ then?  Do the same rules not apply?

Or can we expect the BBC to also justify it if Pakistan decides to fly in a couple of battalions and to cordon off Leeds Bradford airport if the EDL starts marching up there and they have to protect ‘Pakistani citizens’?



The Russian propaganda machine is pumping out material suggesting that the uprising in the Ukraine is a right wing coup….strangely this is also something that the BBC has been propagating as well despite many Ukrainians denying this.




Ukraine: Far-right armed with bats patrol Kiev


Undoubtedly the Far Right are in the mix….along with numerous other groups….but why does the BBC choose just to highlight the Far Right and do Putin’s job for him….the excuse he used to ‘protect’ those ‘ethnic Russians’?



How soon the BBC forgets:

Putin’s youth movement provides a sinister backdrop to Russia’s protests

Huge investment in Nashi by the Kremlin looks like money well spent as thousands of state-backed vigilantes stifle dissent


Russian youths ‘hound UK envoy’



Russia has a new sense of national pride.

Anyone who questions or challenges the value of that may get a visit from Nashi.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone
Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Da Da That’s Putin, Lover Of The Russian Queens

  1. +james says:

    Yes and the Beeb made no mention of this on tonight’s news…..


  2. John says:

    Actually, as far as I can see the BBC has been quite anti-Russian. I think Peter Hitchens has the right approach to Russia and that we shouldn’t jump on the Neo-Con and Liberal bandwagon, as represented by the BBC, of anti-Russia paranoia.


  3. John says:

    It is certainly correct the protestors in Kiev were militant and organised. They were not ‘peaceful’ and for the most part it was they and not the police who were on the offensive, with the police being mostly defensive.

    There are many sinister elements amongst the protestors and the new Ukrainian government, who those calling themselves such. The new deputy PM has a history of anti-semitic comments.

    Lets not get sucked into the Western, liberal anti-Russian nonsense – like the BBC – and instead look at the situation in a more balanced way.


  4. Eddie Smith says:

    I don’t think the BBC have shown any great bias over the Ukraine crisis. I know it’s tempting to compare Ukraine to other troubled areas of the world, but we have to accept that Ukraine is a no-man’s land, its people without any real identity, between Russia and Europe and that both sides have Ukraine under the thumb.

    This is all about which side has the biggest thumb.

    My only gripe about the BBC is that their reporters, in Independence Square in Kiev at the height of the protests, seemed to be stuck like glue to the stereotype left-wing protesters, when most of the protesting was acted out by citizens who we would probably regard as ‘far-right’.


    • Span Ows says:

      ‘citizens’ organised, armed and petrol bombing police and buildings etc BEFORE the government decide police etc should/could retaliate; after that everyone makes out poor peaceful protesters bullied by evil police.


  5. Thoughtful says:

    How many examples are there of the West moving military forces into countries which they have no citizenry, and are not threatened by?
    There was an entire book written on the number of wars started by the war criminal Tony BLiar, and yet we expect Russia to stand by and say nothing.

    In this example and elected government was overthrown by a mob supported by the UK because their aims appeared to be in our interests. Russia has moved in not to protect its citizens, but to protect it’s military base on the Black sea. This base is now critical given the loss (or near loss) of the Syrian naval base. Of course it would be in the Wests advantage if Russia did lose this base, and the fleet, but mainly only to dinosaurs still viewing the world through the lens of the cold war.

    See the hypocrisy for what it is! Russian troops haven’t killed anyone, and the populace there welcome them, no doubt when they leave unlike the West Russia will make sure they are properly provided for.


  6. Roland Deschain says:

    Actually, I’m glad to see the BBC trying to look at things from the Russian perspective. Although the fact that they seem to have missed out the EU poking the hornet’s nest by, amongst other things, having Baroness Ashton pop along for a look-see renders it a less than full analysis.


  7. Old Timer says:

    The facts are there has been a coup d’état in the Ukraine.

    This followed demonstrations, a sit in by thousands in Maidan Square, then full scale riots, which included “peaceful” demonstrators throwing Molotov cocktails at the police. Then the terrible shooting of about 80 people by snipers.

    It was the shooting of those people that finally brought down President Yanukovych and the rest of his government, he was of course blamed for the shootings by everyone, the USA, the EU and all of the Western media. So he ran away rather than he and his family be killed by the rabble. Probably a wise decision.

    The USA and the EU, as well as our young chaps in charge of us in our Parliament, all thought this was wonderful and that democracy had triumphed and Ashton went back to Kiev and dished out a few more sweeties. Lovely jubbly, job done. A lie is told in full view of the world and we are all supposed to fall for it. I am truly living in La La land.

    Well not quite, a certain, President for life, of the far flung country of Russia was not so pleased. He had a few boats with nasty big guns and missiles moored off the port in Sevastopol in the south of Ukraine and he has a few million comrades living in the Ukraine. So what to do, can’t have the rabble messing with my boats? Well, he sent a few chaps to march around with some guns just in case any daft blighters got any silly ideas.

    Then all hell broke loose. “IT’S AN INVASION” said Barry, the leader of the new communist state of America. This line was then followed by everyone west of line drawn through Kiev all the way to Alaska. We will start sanctions against Russia said Barry & Ashton. Err no, we can’t do that said Ashton or granny will get too cold in winter, as we all use gas and coal from Russia. And we don’t want to have a war because nasty Putin might drop a bomb back on us. I know what we’ll do we’ll call them nasty names.

    Just a few other facts to throw in the mix.
    28 of those shot were policemen. The Estonian Foreign Minister, Umas Paet, has told Aston that there are mounting reports that the snipers were not police but professionals mercenaries. Some say there was CIA involvement, others will blame Putin. However, Ashton just replied, “ no really, well well, tut tut, I shall have to ask for my sweeties back”. Meanwhile the fascists and hard line communists, the far right, the far left, whatever you want to call them, are making inroads that will lead to civil war if it is not stamped on. The West started it, so it won’t help. So guess who will?

    The last fact.
    It’s a dirty world. Do not believe what you are told by people with vested interests. Especially the BBC and the EU. They are both run by unelected commissars who want to expand their empires and will hang on to power to the last moment believing they are right. The sad thing is that the leader of the so called free world, the President of the USA, now wants to follow the same path.

    By the way, NATO aircraft killed five soldiers with bombs today in Afghanistan and we call Putin a thug. Hypocrites.


    • DP111 says:

      Great comment.

      I wonder when we will get an admission of the serial lies that the US and UK have fed the public over Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, Libya etc etc. And we must not forget Bosnia and Serbia – two Muslim states created in Europe, over the graves of millions of the like of King Sobieski, to drive Islam out of Europe.

      All these invasions were illegal, and were done under the cover of new “true” excuses, when the old ones ran out of fuel. The result has been the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, destruction of basic infrastructure in the countries concerned, that will lead to countless more deaths well into the future.

      These invasions have also destabilised the fragile ethnic and religious balance, leading to the uncorking of the demons of fratricide – more deaths by bomb and bullet.

      Russia must have viewed the MO of US and the West in the above light, and could see that the West was out to sow instability right next to Russia, and then lay the blame on Russia. Russia would then have a real headache for decades, and keep it from interfering in the West’s global strategic goals.

      The shrill behaviour of Western politicians since their bluff was called, confirms that this was the motive for destabilising Ukraine.


      • DP111 says:

        Its noticeable that Kerry etal are claiming that what they were doing was to bring real democracy to Ukraine.

        Well that was what they said the same for Iraq, Libya, etc. How has that worked out?


      • moise pippic says:

        What do you mean by
        “And we must not forget Bosnia and Serbia – two Muslim states created in Europe, over the graves of millions of the like of King Sobieski, to drive Islam out of Europe”.

        Are you saying “King Sobieski’s” resistance to the Ottaman conquest was wrong? That its OK for Islam to advance into the West but not for the West to resist? Kindly explain your comment as I find it confusing.


        • DP111 says:

          What I mean is that King Sobieski, Prince Eugene and their armies, sacrificed their lives to remove Islam from Europe. All that was undone by Clinton and Blair. And now we have in Europe, one narco-Islamic state, and another where Jihadis are welcome.

          Apologies if my comment was misleading.


    • Dave s says:

      very good comment. The defining feature of liberalism’s foreign policy is it’s aggressiveness founded upon a lack of realism. . It is on a par with the liberal’s domestic policies. Fantasies that the liberal needs in order to fill the void in the liberal’s wretched life.
      True conservatives simply do not behave like that.
      I see Putin as a conservative countering liberal faux revolution and determind to protect the integrity of Russia’s borders.


    • Span Ows says:

      a good comment Old Timer concurring with my own view; funnily enough I surprise myself when I realise I’m “on the Ruskies side”!


  8. Mice Height says:

    What disgusts me most about this entire debacle is the lack of coloured faces seen in the news reports.


  9. Vlad says:

    ‘The BBC seem quite relaxed about Putin’s little invasion….

    Relaxed how? Seems they’ve been reporting it quite abit. ind of to be expected of a news broadcaster.

    ”The BBC makes a lot of the status of ‘ethnic Russians’ inside the Ukraine….wouldn’t they be Ukrainian then?’

    Well, yes hey are. Have you no understanding of the situation? I’d suggest reading some of the BBC’s coverage. You might learn something.

    ‘The BBC always reassures us that Muslims are even more British than the British..’ Really? when? where? Or have you just made that up?

    ‘The Russian propaganda machine is pumping out material suggesting that the uprising in the Ukraine is a right wing coup….strangely this is also something that the BBC has been propagating as well despite many Ukrainians denying this.’ You say propagating, I say reporting.

    ‘Undoubtedly the Far Right are in the mix….’ Make up your mind Alan, which is it?!?

    Anyone else get the feeling Alan doesn’t know hat he’s talking about?…..again.


  10. thoughtful says:

    What seems to have been kept really quiet is the reason for the civil war in the Balkans. We have been expected to believe that a few naughty men described as ‘right wing’ decided one day that they didn’t like Muslims so some how the whole non Muslim population rose up to kill them.

    The tale told to a child perhaps and indicative of bBC beliefs of the intellect of its consumers

    They never mention that the Muslims in the region joined Hitlers SS and slaughtered the non Muslims, after all that would be to ascribe some guilt to them and a reason for the other side to take their revenge. That would never do!


  11. stuart says:

    i aint no taking sides in this conflict,i can understand both sides worrys about there cultural heritage,but what is really pissing me off about this conflict is this blanket term far right used by not only the bbc but there sister station rt on freeview to describe people who are not far right but are just normal people like us,ok there might be a few right wingers amongst the demonstrators but look at the demos we have in the uk which have plenty of commes.marxists and stalinists who hurl bricks and petrol bombs at the police,they are never smeared by the bbc and other media outlets as far left stalinist thugs of which they are.so less of this smearing bbc and more of telling the truth about both sides in this conflict.


    • thoughtful says:

      Never forget that the term ‘far right’ is deliberately misleading as all of them are just factions of the left.

      All thugs are from the left, but there’s little chance of the bBC reporting the facts that way.


      • ROBERT BROWN says:

        Thanks thoughtful, i was going to mention that about the ‘Far Right’ too. They are actually the Far Left, right-wing people like me want the shrinking of the State and real democracy to be the aim, how about abolishing Norman law and polishing up the previous Anglo-Saxon system, which very much had the peoples interests over any Lords. Say far right and what do the left think? Nazis. WRONG. They were socialists, red in tooth and claw, just maybe to the right of Stalin a touch. They get very touchy the lefties when you try to educate them on this…….


        • Vlad says:

          This is BiasedBBC comedy gold:
          ‘All thugs are from the left, but there’s little chance of the bBC reporting the facts that way. ‘

          I know you don’t want to be associated with some of these people but that doesn’t meant they aren’t right wing. You need a good politics text book.


  12. Dave says:

    I’m at a loss to see how you can claim the BBC is at all pro-Russian in its coverage. The exact opposite is the case. Every news report and the overall coverage is geared towards demonstrating that Russia is wrong. The BBC have largely opted for endless unanalysed comments from Kerry, Hague and the EU’s Catherine Ashton, therefore making Putin the bad boy, totally ignoring any context or indeed Western interest in gaining control of Ukrainian markets. No or little mention by the BBC of the extreme right wing now having a major say in Ukrainian politics and government and their visceral hatred of all things Russian. For the first time in my life I have a deep distrust of the BBC news. Appallingly biased coverage.


    • Vlad says:

      Russia is wrong, one can be impartial and still say that.


      • Dave says:

        True, and I could have written my comment better. My point is really that the BBC’s position on Ukraine and Russia does not come across as impartial at all. There is no analysis of the wider context, no examination of the West’s financial and geopolitical interests in the region, little or no examination of the political aims and opinions of the new government in Kiev. The narrative is one of the EU and the West fighting for freedom and the portrayal of Putin as self-interested, etc. The BBC don’t always explicitly state such things but by the focus of their reporting and coverage, how they choose certain news stories and prioritize them in news reports and on their website, and what they omit to say, they achieve a very one-sided story.


      • John says:

        Yes, Russia is wrong. It is also right. Ukraine is wrong and right as well. There is no simple good and bad in this conflict.


  13. Pounce says:

    Well as there is a Putin in the story, I thought this would be a nice foil to the ugliness in the World today:

    Ironically Bobby (The Male) died in….Russia


  14. Gunn says:

    These are the facts on the ground:

    The US agitates for an overthrow of the democratically elected Ukrainian government, looking to go around its EU ‘allies’ (the infamous Nuland ‘fuck the EU’ tape), and funds a pro-western group that they may or may not know are basically neo-fascists.

    The ‘protesters’ stage violent demonstrations, and appear to have used snipers to shoot at both sides during these demonstrations, in a false flag operation.

    Once they overthrew the government in Kiev, they began to enact anti-russian laws, and there are reports of mob violence including mass murder against ethnic russians or russian speakers.

    Crimea’s legislature regards the Kiev protesters as illegitimate (which they are, having usurped the leadership by violence), and fearing the consequences of more anti-russian legislature, pass a virtually unanimous resolution to secede to Russia, subject to ratification by referendum in just over a week’s time.

    Around these basic facts, you have the longer term geopolitical machinations of the US in the region – an encirclement around Russia over the last decade, aimed at placing bases and hardware designed to neuter Russia’s ICBM capability.

    This is an extraordinarily dangerous game being played by the US and its allies, and its being supported by a compliant media that is keen to dismiss or overlook key facts.

    The BBC is as much at fault as any other major western network, but one can’t in good faith put this down to its traditional left-wing bias.


  15. Vlad says:

    There’s not one fact in that spiel. You’ve been watching too much RT. You do know its funded by the Kremlin, and is a proper state propaganda outlet?!?!

    ‘The ‘protesters’ stage violent demonstrations, and appear to have used snipers to shoot at both sides during these demonstrations, in a false flag operation. ‘

    You’re talking about a phone call in which the Estonian FM says some people in Ukraine believe that. Or as the Estonians have said:
    ”Foreign Minister Paet was giving an overview of what he had heard the previous day in Kiev and expressed concern over the situation on the ground,’ it said.

    ‘We reject the claim that Paet was giving an assessment of the opposition’s involvement in the violence.’

    Not much of a ‘fact’ is it?

    I’ll go with the British forensic experts and the video footage:



    • Gunn says:

      I follow most mainstream news channels, the BBC and RT included, but tend to treat them all as suspect in some fashion.

      The questions around who the snipers were employed by is an open one, with the weight of evidence from a variety of local sources tending to support the false flag narrative.

      One of the huge issues with the Ukraine situation is that apart from local eye-witness sources, typically found across a smattering of blogs or small websites across the internet, there is virtually no reliable news from any of the ‘big’ news providers. This on its own is damning of the journalistic profession (and ironically, one of the reasons that the BBC falsely uses to justify its exorbitant license fees is that their journalists do have the integrity and lack of commercial duress to allow them to report fearlessly on the truth of things) but would not matter so much if it wasn’t for the fact that the supine western press is allowing us to sleepwalk into a huge mess that could escalate all the way to a nuclear exchange if handled badly.

      I notice also that you categorically fail to rebut any of the other items I listed, and went after the item that was prone to a degree of interpretation and which I said ‘appear to have used’ (but even here, if you seek out local sources, there is ample support for it).


    • John says:

      Weren’t many police shot by snipers? Why would the state do this? Seems unlikely.