Skip to main content

Russian Fascism, Russian Propaganda, and Western Censorship


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMECmLXXPrs

Future historians will have nice color videos to go along with their war documentaries dealing with their evil totalitarian dictators and propagandists of the 21st century. Sadly, this video is also a victim of non-Russian propaganda as well (this time what they don't want you to hear). That's not good, and speeches should obviously not be cut in order to conceal "unsavory" information, and this speech will no doubt go into the historical record for this war.

So what's missing? The very bad cut at 0:06 removes a part where he says, "'Muslims have a notion of jihad' which he proceeded to describe as fight against your enemy and your internal 'bads' at the sametime." (via Russian Reddit user FurImmerNewfag, and somewhat verified by myself, using the unedited video from the 10/1 Reddit post "Actual crowd response to Okhlobystin speech today").

But man, they really got the right looking guy for the job. Circle glasses, leather coat, leather gloves, face, demeanor. Everything is perfect *chef's kiss" if you are looking for a quick depiction of a fascist.
________________________________

Here is a video with a bit more at the beginning, but the censored phrases still removed:


And here is a Reddit post with the (internally) uncut speech, including the phrases above, but only in Russian.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Islamic State has beheaded at least 21 Christians in Libya.

Whenever a Muslim brings up the Crusades, I have to laugh to myself.  Christians have done horrible things, including in later crusades against Constantinople and the Cathars in particular.  However, get this.  The Islamic State militants said, "Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for" right before butchering Egyptian Christians. It seems that many Muslims haven't taken a single history class.  If they had, they would have known that Christians existed in Egypt for 400 years before Islam.  (Heck, they were even around to murder Hypatia, perhaps the last major ancient female philosopher.)  It was the Muslims who were the "Crusaders"...yet almost nobody will admit to this.  Muslims instigated a merciless war against Christian Egyptians until they were overcome and under Islamic domination.  They did this to people across the world, from Spain to India...massacring any who resisted.  They tried to destroy the Byzaintine Em...
Post a Comment
Read more
Sokal-style hoaxes work for religious postmodernists, but (post) modernism is the real hoax Modernism in art and architecture, and postmodernism in philosophy are, like religion, insults to human intelligence.  Unfortunately, many people fall for their hollow propaganda. The "Sokal Affair" was a hoax whereby a man called Alan Sokal submitted a postmodern-sounding article to a postmodern journal.  It turns out that the English you hear isn't just unintelligible to you, but it's unintelligible to the people at the journal as well.  But if it's unintelligible, it must be profound, right?  The journal quickly accepted it, not knowing that it was all fake B.S.  They then got embarrassed when they were told that it was pompous-sounding drivel. Religion has done the same thing.  When people can't understand something, they generally think it's much more profound than if they can understand it.  If a priest speaks Latin, wears some weird costume, and sp...
Post a Comment
Read more

In Defense of...Cecil Rhodes?!

You all know Cecil Rhodes, right?  He was a British Imperialist (living from 1853-1902) who founded the De Beers diamond mining and trading company.  Just this morning, I came upon a post comparing him to Adolf Hitler, and claiming that Cecil Rhodes killed at least 60 million Africans.  It has been shared 99 times.  Here is the post: https://plus.google.com/+TonyJefferson/posts/CZ6HW3AxDo6 Unlike many, I decided to do some research on it.  That is my nature.  I don't accept things without evidence given, and even when no evidence is provided, I search for evidence.  If after looking, no evidence is forthcoming, then I discount the claim unless compelling evidence does surface.  After my research on this topic (taking up about an hour of my day and 28 open tabs on my browser...but still an enjoyable time because this is what I like to do), I found that my initial skepticism was well justified and that this comparison is incorrect.  Adolph H...
3 comments
Read more