The extraordinary protests that followed Russia’s Dec. 4 parliamentary elections continue to resound  – an incredibly rare scene in the Russian capital. Demonstrators are angry at recent election results that kept Vlamidir Putin’s United Russia party in power.

Putin, who is currently the prime minister, plans to run for president next year – a post he’s already held twice and while his ruling party suffered a blow at last week’s elections, it still has the majority in parliament.

Al Jazeera’s Neave Barker reports from Moscow.

Related: Russian Election Protests Biggest in 2 Decades –Steve Inskeep & David Greene | NPR (Audio)

Russia’s Election Protest and the Soviet Past –Robert Conquest | Newsweek/The Daily Beast

Things to Watch…

1) In China- a dispute between farmers and local authorities has led to open rebellion in Wukan Village. Is this the beginning of a revolution in China?

2) In Russia- Boris Gryzlov resigned as Speaker of Russian Parliament in an effort to ease tensions after the uproar over fraud in the parliamentary elections last week.  With Mr. Gryzlov’s resignation- has Mr. Putin lost a powerful ally?

3) The United States has officially declared an end to the Iraq War- will the Muslim world take comfort that the U.S. is out of Iraq?

4) In Syria- Rebel forces killed 27 Syrian soldiers in southern part of the country- is this the beginning of a civil war?

Lighter Notes….

1) Swim Good by Frank Ocean and Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas by Ella Fitzgerald are the songs I’m digging this week.

2) Clip of the Week!!

3) Movie of the Week is  A Christmas Carol  (1984) directed by Clive Donner

4) Quote of the Week!!”Is it a crime, to fight, for what is mine?”- Tupac Shakur

Besides the ongoing discussions around whether to vote or not, users were also eager to discuss possible results and the final outcomes. In terms of Islamist leading ahead of the elections, 55% off all monitored comments welcomed the result. For example Tweeter Aliaa Hamed asked “Why are people shocked of the progress of the Brotherhood and Salafists, as if it was a surprise?! Those who feel sad shall work hard, run in the remaining two rounds, and vote for the civil streams.” Facebook fan Zeinab Zoza added “Egypt is Islamic, and this will make the secularists or liberals understand that the nation loves and trusts its religion and will not accept a secular state.” On the other side 40% opposed the results and even feared Islamists in power. On Youm7, an independent news website, reader Genuine Egyptian said: “Do you know what the Islamists will do if they take power? They will force all the women to wear veils; close all the cinemas and theaters, prevent women from driving cars, and destroy tourism.”

For a better overview the following results are divided by the social media types. Most data was captured on Microblogs (71%), fewest on Forums with only 1%.

Microblogs

Similar to the actual turnout in the Egyptian web-community the majority claimed to want to participate in the elections. About two out of three users supported participation in the elections, only one third was against the vote because of the “unfair” conditions. Interestingly 70% continued protests even though they favored the elections. For example prominent human rights campaigner Hossam Bahgat stated: “I’m against military rule and against the Ganzouri [new] cabinet and I support Tahrir Square and the immediate transfer of power to civilians, but I will participate in the elections.” Out of the group that called for a boycott of the elections 90% described the elections as corrupt as long as they are held under military rule. Blogger Ahmed Elmoqdamy said: “I would boycott the elections because they are illegitimate under the military rule that I call to topple.” Overall in the discussion most popular-used Hashtags were #Egypt, #Election and #egyelections. The protesters also used #SCAF, #NOSCAF and #tahrir.

Other popular Tweets regarding the elections:

Facebook

Among the Facebook Pages with the most discussions about the elections, was the fanpage ‘We Are All Khaled Said’ with close to 165,000 ‘Likes’ and over 2,400 ‘People Talking about it’. Originally this page was founded to honor an 28-year-old Egyptian who was tortured to death at the hands of two police officers. Since its launch this page serves as a common platform for all kind of protests against the regime and is also used as a popular exchange forum during the Egypt elections. One much shared post by famous activist Wael Ghonim stated on November 28: “Elections will be held tomorrow. In a nutshell, we all have to participate and choose our candidates. It’s one of the stages of the democratic transition in Egypt and we have to protect it. No one should lag behind the participation because the next parliament is the one that will decide upon the future of Egypt.” As a response for example fan Omar Helal said: “I’m anxious that the election will be held over two days, and I think it will be rigged.” The total post received over 3,300 Likes, 500 shares and 900 comments:

Generally many social media users like Emad Hussein, also dedicated the elections to January 25: “Despite all events, I’m very happy with and proud of today’s elections. Thanks for all who contributed to making this day. Thank you Tahrir Square.” Kimo Systimo goes even further and “salutes to the blood of the martyrs who made this possible and enables them to live freely”. On Facebook the overwhelming majority of posts were in Arabic language.

News Websites

Some quotes from popular news websites:

Al Dostor (opposition news website): “Remember that every vote counts and regardless of who ultimately wins, we must all do our part and vote for the party and the candidates that represent our values and our aspirations for equality, justice and dignity for all Egyptians. People of Egypt, vote and save Egypt from the powers of darkness and fascism.”

Al Wafd News (liberal news website): “The Egyptian people insist on the success of the elections. We will stand against any attempt to spoil this democratic process.”

Masrawy (independent news website): “All the candidates are opportunists and politically corrupt. This parliament will be full of the ex-regime remnants who nominated themselves under new parties. This is the viewpoint of a lot of Egyptians.”

Youm7 (independent news website): “May God bless Egypt. This election is the most important thing now. All the Egyptians must unite and vote to participate in the success of the elections.”

Forum:

Some quotes from popular forum entries:

Fatakat (specialized forum for women and their interests): “We must vote to move a step forward towards democracy. May God help us choose the best candidate.”

Christian Dogma (prominent Christian forum): “May God support all the voters. I hope that these elections will be transparent and fair.”

Next steps

The second round of elections will take place on December 14 and 15 with the run-off on 21–22 December. Third round will continue on 3–4 January with the run-off on 10–11 January. The final presidential elections are expected to be held in July 2012.

Scope Note:

The Buzz Report monitors trends and themes that recently buzzed on various social media platforms.  This explicit search was conducted on all social media platforms in Egypt in Arabic and English language during the week of the Egypt elections. The focus of the research was on social media conversations and social media trends reflecting the sentiment towards the Egyptian vote.

If you are further interested in monitoring any special event, political development or a certain brand/product we welcome you to contact us at info@social-eyez.com. We also appreciate any suggestions and improvements regarding this Blog. Also follow us on Twitter and like our Facebook-Page to get regular updates regarding future Buzz Reports.

Other Buzz-Reports related to this topic:

Jailed Egypt Blogger: Maikel Nabil

Zaid Hamdan

Syrian Revolution

Awakening of the Arab consciousness

Libya

According to the BBC, the Telegraph, the Huffington Post, and just about every respectable news source, the recent parliamentary elections in Russia were flawed, seriously flawed. According to OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) problems included ballot box stuffing. I don’t know if voter intimidation was included in the problems, but why bother poking people with bayonets when you just stuffing the ballot boxes anyway? In the final count, Putin’s United Russia Party maintained a slim majority in the country’s Duma.

Putin’s knee-jerk response to the outrage is to blame the U.S. The Russian President, Medvedev insists that the elections were “free and fair.” I guess being Putin’s puppet is a decent job in post-Communist Russia.  On Tuesday Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov responded angrily to comments Mrs. Clinton made about the conduct of the elections during an OSCE meeting in Lithuania.

“This is not Hyde Park, this is not Triumfalnaya [Triumphal] Square in Moscow, where speakers arrive to pour out their soul and then turn around and leave, not listening to others. –Sergei Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister

Despite attempts to bring Russia into the community of nations, Putin, a former KGB agent in East Germany, prefers to rely on Communist-era rhetoric to rally his followers. I applaud the Obama administration for not kowtowing to Putin’s thuggery. Secretary of State Clinton has on more than one occasion denounced this rigged election. Putin will be running for president again, after a hiatus as Prime Minister. Russia’s tissue thin constitution forbids more than two consecutive terms as president. Well, we’ve seen how Vlad got around that one. He put a puppet in his place as president, as a place holder, until he can run again and sit in the presidential seat for two more terms. Vladimir Putin is well on his way to becoming Stalin II. Stalin was a butcher of his own people on a massive scale, so let’s call Vladimir Stalin 2.0, or Stalin Lite. That’s because Vladimir Putin targets his enemies and with laser pinpoint accuracy murders them with slow and horrible poisons. He copies Stalin in killing his assassins by using methods that poison the poisoner as well as the intended victim; such as radioactive compounds. Sometimes he resorts to old fashioned methods, as in the case of Anna Politkovskaya, who was shot in the back of the head as she was leaving her apartment. Her poor daughter was an unfortunate witness.

Of the hundreds that have been arrested in street protests in Moscow, and other major cities such as St. Petersburg, how many will have their life-spans shortened by a decade or two? Please watch the video at the top of this post to see how open protest is dealt with in Russia. I can’t help but compare the actions with the police in several major American cities in response to the Occupy movement. But that’s a story for another post- a compare and contrast of police-state activity in Russia and the U.S.

Golos, the only Russian organization that tried to monitor the elections is under the gun now. Golos leader Liliya Shibanova was held by customs officers at Sheremetyevo Airport after returning from a trip abroad on the eve of the election. If I were a member of Golos (which means “voice” in Russian and can be construed to mean “vote”) I would quit and move to Sweden. But that just cowardly me. I have a strong sense of self-preservation.

Perhaps the biggest story to emerge from Sunday’s parliamentary elections in Russia is the central role played by new media. To be sure, the failure of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party to obtain a solid majority in the State Duma, even while cheating, is significant. But the Kremlin-approved parties that profited from the antigovernment protest vote—the ultranationalist Liberal Democratic Party, the Communist Party, and the faux-opposition A Just Russia party—appear unlikely to stimulate reform. The election results thus reflected deep disillusionment with Putin, but utterly failed to provide a road map to future change.

On the other hand, new media and information technology—blogs, camera-equipped mobile phones, YouTube, Twitter—clearly influenced the outcome and continue to fuel the resulting protests. To begin with, these media platforms provide an alternative to the regime-controlled broadcast sector. Domination of the traditional media’s commanding heights has been a central feature of Putin’s strategy for political control. Russian television regularly features Putin as both political leader and virile man of the people, part of an effort to create a cult of personality. The opposition is rarely covered at all. The internet, meanwhile, has been allowed more freedom to carry antigovernment views, perhaps because of a perception that it has only a marginal influence on popular opinion. The vast majority of Russians still get most, if not all, of their news from state-controlled television stations. Or at least they did, before December 4, 2011.

The prominence of new media grew significantly thanks to the numerous amateur videos showing apparent election fraud that were posted on a YouTube channel entirely dedicated to documenting such abuses during the Duma balloting. These videos, along with related posts on other sites, received a stunning number of views; some garnered over 1 million hits, which is truly extraordinary for online media in Russia. Here are three frequently viewed examples of blatant cheating during the Duma elections:

1. An amateur election monitor shows a stack of ballots, found in a ballot box, that seem to have been filled out all at once and inserted together (1,409,349 views as of December 8).

2. Amateur journalists document vote buying at a Moscow polling station (1,007,586 views as of December 8). This video reports that a group of people were paid 1,000 rubles ($32) each to vote for United Russia.

3. The head of an election committee is caught on video apparently filling out a stack of ballots for United Russia at his desk in Moscow polling station No. 2501 (1,811,884 views as of December 8).

It is worth noting that over the past several years, various government officials have begun to speak of the need to “control” the interne t. Just this week, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov quashed an effort spearheaded by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to put the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) on record as opposing internet censorship. We can expect further calls for internet controls in the future, especially if regime opponents ratchet up the volume of criticism in advance of the presidential election in March.

Meanwhile, Putin has already dispelled any hopes that setbacks to his popularity might produce some reflection, humility, and a new posture toward the outside world. The upsurge of protests that followed the reports of election fraud provoked a tried-and-true response: blame the United States. In this case the target was Secretary Clinton, who had put forward an unusually blunt statement about the unfree and unfair Russian polling. “She set the tone for some in our country and gave them a signal,” Putin declared. “They heard the signal, and with the active support of the U.S. State Department, began active work.”

The fact that Clinton made her statement well after the protests had begun, and after OSCE vote monitors had released a scathing preliminary report, was, it seems, an unimportant detail for Putin.

Kremlin-aligned spinmeister Sergei Markov made remarks that should qualify him for the hall of fame of political cynicism. “The protest mood is very widespread,” Markov admitted to the New York Times. “Especially in Moscow and Petersburg, people are broadly convinced that there was falsification.” He then added that Russians are skeptical of the usefulness of street protest. “In Russia, people are strongly convinced that if there are protests, then nothing good will come out of them.” Russian officials will thus treat the protesters like a complaining child. “The authorities will attempt to conduct themselves with society as a parent would a child who is crying and demanding some kind of toy. In this case, it is not correct to go out and buy the child a toy, but rather distract him with something else.” As the Times notes, blaming America for interfering with Russia’s “sovereignty” could be that something else. We should all hope they have nothing more adventurous in mind.

Overcoming Russian skepticism will be a major challenge as protest organizers attempt to win the hearts and minds of the broader population. However, it should be emphasized that the public’s doubts center on the usefulness of protests, not on their justification. In fact, widespread skepticism, directed at the government and its claims, could work in the opposition’s favor. There is a growing belief among even non–politically active citizens that United Russia is, as the antigovernment slogan puts it, a “party of crooks and thieves.” The uncensored online revelations of election fraud have only reinforced that impression. Now that a groundswell of popular frustration has burst the dikes of poll rigging and media management and spilled into public view, more ordinary Russians may be willing to add their voices to the protesters’ demands.

* Arch Puddington is vice president for research at Freedom House. Katherin Machalek is a research analyst for Nations in Transit.

// <![CDATA[
// &lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
// &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;![CDATA[
var a2a_config = a2a_config || {};
a2a_config.linkname = &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;A Victory for the Net in Russia&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;;
a2a_config.linkurl =&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;http://blog.freedomhouse.org/weblog/2011/12/a-victory-for-the-net-in-russia.html&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;;
// ]]&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;amp;gt;
// ]]&amp;gt;
// ]]&gt;
// ]]>

For the last two days, Muscovites have been taking to the streets to protest the recent (and rigged) Russian parliamentary election results. They have been joined by many people from other Russian cities who have dropped everything to join these unprecedented protests.

For a summary of the activities that took place on Monday and Tuesday, click here and here. The WaPo also has some good photos. You can also see my Twitter feed, where I’ve been re-tweeting the live tweets directly from the streets.

Here are a few important takeaways:

1. Many of the participants are first-time protestors. Before this, they considered themselves too cynical to participate in oppositional activism, let alone vote in elections they knew to be rigged. Thousands upon thousands are meeting in the streets despite the heavy (and predictably violent) presence of police and special forces.
2. People are very active online, on Facebook for events, and on Twitter (the hashtag for Monday was #5dec or #5дек, but I’m not sure what they are using now). Some are drawing comparisons to Tahrir Square.
3. There are widespread (and deeply-held) rumors that Americans and other foreigners are paying Russians $$ to participate in such protests in order to tarnish Russia’s image. Putin has said things to spread this type of belief in the past. Even activists are wary of American support (as evidence by the tone when I wrote an English-language message of support on Facebook).
4. Putin’s response has been to organize massive rallies of supporters for the “United Russia” party. People are being bused to Moscow, and one woman, when asked why she was joining, replied: “I don’t know–they just put us on a bus.”

This LiveJournal user (reminder: LiveJournal or Живо́й Журна́л is a serious blogging platform in Russia) posted some great photos. I’ve translated some of the signs in the images:

• Photo #3: Police attempted to keep #s low by using metal detectors. So many people showed up that they spilled onto neighboring boulevards.
• Photo #5: “These elections are a farce” and “UnitedRussia in the trash” (except the Russian has great word play that I can’t translate).
• Photo #4: “Russia Will Be Free” and “We’ll Return Power to the People.”
• Photo #6: “Gays and Lesbians Against Crooks and Thieves.”
• Last photo reads “United Russia is the party of crooks and thieves.”

Let’s see what comes of all this. And don’t forget that the presidential elections are coming up in March, when Putin is expected to take back his old job (how convenient).

12-5-11

On December 4, parliamentary elections were held to fill 450 State Duma seats, Russia’s Federal Assembly lower house.

With nearly all votes counted, RIA Novosti said Medvedev/Putin’s United Russia party won 238 seats, falling slightly below a majority with 49.67% of the vote.

It added that it’s “a far cry from the commanding two-thirds constitutional majority the party held in the State Duma for the past four years” based on tabulated results so far.

United Russia is the nation’s dominant party. In December 2001, it was founded by merging the Unity and Fatherland-All Russia parties.

Vladimir Putin served as acting President after Boris Yeltsin resigned on December 31, 1999. From May 7, 2000 – May 7, 2008, he was President. Dmitry Medvedev succeeded him. Putin now serves as Prime Minister. He’s the United Russia 2012 presidential candidate. On March 4, presidential elections will be held.

After a decade in power, it’s common for incumbent parties to lose strength. Nonetheless, despite likely coalition agreements on some issues, United Russia remains dominant. Moreover, Putin’s heavily favored to win in 2012.

With near final Duma votes counted, results were:

United Russia – 49.67%

two small parties getting under 1% each.

Under Russian electoral laws, Duma seats are proportionally distributed to parties getting at least 7% of the vote.

Because several didn’t qualify, United Russia maintains a ruling majority. Nonetheless, President Medvedev expressed willingness to have coalition partners, saying:

“We will have to take into account the more complex configuration of the Duma and for some issues we will have to join coalition bloc agreements.”

Ballots were cast in 94,000 domestic polling stations across Russia and about 370 overseas locations in over 140 foreign countries.

CEC officials said irregularities disqualified 1% of electoral ballots.

Major Media Bashing

On December 4, New York Times writers David Herszenhorn and Ellen Barry headlined, “Majority for Putin’s Party Narrows in Rebuke From Voters,” saying:

United Russia “suffered surprisingly steep losses in parliamentary elections on Sunday….The three minority parties….all made strong gains….”

“Critics of the government have said for weeks that they expected widespread campaign abuses, and reports of electoral violations streamed into online social networks during the early morning hours….”

On December 5, Russia Today (RT.com) reported that on election day, a Russian Internet site claimed an alleged United Russia scheme “to conduct an illegal throw-in of ballots at one of the polling stations in Moscow.”

It said

“some obscure political specialists had gathered a group of about 40 people, described as ‘drunks and low-lifes,’ and handed them special secret pockets and packs of filled ballots, marked United Russia.”

In fact, three of the 40 were undercover reporters. When the alleged group arrived, they claimed fraud. Other reports about throw-in ballots also surfaced. A top Central Election Commission (CEC) official admitted some violations occurred.

CEC’s Leonid Ivlev mentioned “invisible ink, illegal propaganda, and the so-called ‘merry-go-round’ false voting” by specially prepared people.

However, the invisible ink scheme was uncovered and stopped. “Merry-go-round” fraud was grossly exaggerated. Minor violations only occurred. They’re common everywhere in contrast to major US electoral fraud.

Notably in 2000 and 2004, Democrats Gore and Kerry won popular and electoral college victories, but George Bush became president for eight years illegitimately.

In addition, key Senate and House elections were also tainted. No wonder under a system where corporate-controlled machines vote, not citizens.

Ivlev said “many reports (about alleged Russian electoral fraud) simply showed a lack of understanding of the election procedure.”

Moreover, Deputy Interior Minister Aleksander Gorovoi said police registered 2050 violations all day. However, none compromised final results. Most “concerned illegal propaganda and the police had started administrative cases into these matters.”

Independent (CEC-invited) international monitors checked voting in over 30 Russian regions. They concluded the process was calm and orderly. Polish monitor Mateus Piskorski said, “All complaints are about technical issues and not about violations of election law.”

Institute for Democracy and Cooperation director of studies John Laughland called electoral procedures “absolutely excellent.” He added that polling station workers were “extremely competent.”

Nonetheless, The Times said cellphone video footage showed “heavy-handed politicking, including attempts at bribery, campaign law violations and other manipulation.”

It added that throughout the day, scattered reports cited “voting irregularities, a smattering of protests and some arrests.”

Times and other major media writers, commentators and editorials notoriously bash electoral results in non-US client states.

In contrast, when the Supreme Court reversed America’s 2000 popular vote (and electoral one learned months late) to install its own favorite, a Times editorial supported Bush’s illegitimacy and “unusual” post-election “gracious(ness).”

Electoral fraud wasn’t mentioned nor was cheating John Kerry in 2004. Moreover, America’s corrupted duopoly power gets no coverage whatever.

Instead, reports claim model US democratic governance when, in fact, it’s not tolerated, never was, and on December 1 lost all legitimacy.

Following last May’s House vote, the Senate followed suit. They authorized detaining uncharged US citizens indefinitely in military dungeons, based on spurious allegations of supporting terrorism.

Media scoundrels don’t object, including Washington Post writers, commentators, and editorial writers.

On December 3, its editorial headlined, “The farce of Russian elections,” saying:

“Russia’s hermetic political system – a parody of democracy that begrudges dissent and bristles at independent voices – is growing even less tolerant.”

“Vladimir Putin has turned from glowering at the country’s only independent elections watchdog to outright intimidation. In the process, he has reverted to Cold War rhetoric and cemented the Kremlin’s reputation for thuggery in high places.”

Fact check

Money power in private hands controls America’s media. They’re a platform for managed and junk food news. Dissent in America is an endangered species. On US television, it’s entirely absent, and little appears in corporate controlled print.

In contrast, Iran’s Press TV, Russia Today and Voice of Russia air diverse discussions and opinions on major global issues. US viewers can access them online to stay current and well-informed, free of Western propaganda America’s media feature.

Putin is one of the few world leaders with backbone enough to challenge US lawlessness. As a result, America’s media pillory him instead of explaining destructive US policies threatening humanity’s survival.

Russian officials “turn(ed) up the heat on Golos (Russian for ‘voice’), an independent group of election monitors largely funded by US and other Western groups.”

Fact check

Golos gets National Endowment for Democracy funding. It supports regime change in Venezuela, Syria, Iran and other non-US client states. It backs opposition groups, conducts propaganda campaigns, and does openly what CIA operative do covertly to destabilize sitting governments.

Its mission is subverting, not promoting democracy. It operates with State Department funding and direction. It serves US imperial interests destructively against targeted countries.

So do USAID and the National Democratic Institute (NDI). They meddle internally against sitting governments. One way is by funding Golos. It calls itself a Russian NGO established in 2000 to defend democratic rights and civil liberties. It’s Russia’s only allegedly “independent” electoral watchdog.

The UK Telegraph calls it “one of the few organizations able to catalogue and publicize (Kremlin) attempts at fraud and intimidation.”

In fact, Russian electoral authorities found it violated election laws by publishing polls during a prohibited “quiet period” preceding voting. Of course, taking US funding with strings corrupts its independence entirely and violates Russian law.

Under the 1907 Tillman Act, “foreign national” funding of US elections is illegal. Similar legislation followed. In 1971, the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) instituted more stringent disclosure requirements for federal candidates, political parties, and political action committees (PACs). Foreign funding in America in all forms is prohibited.

In contrast, Washington meddles regularly in elections abroad to influence their outcomes. America’s media suppress what they should headline. Instead, they endorse illegal foreign funding and other illegal practices.

The Washington Post claimed Golos NED, NDI, and USAID funding lets them “be impartial.” It also said Putin’s likely reelection next year means “growing number(s) of Russians (will) chafe (under) a system that takes his commands and uses the niceties of democracy, including elections, as window dressing.”

It added that he’s “never been one to settle for simple victory when unchallenged supremacy can be gained by use of threat, political manipulation and bullying.”

His “loyal lieutenant (Medvedev) warned that Russia may aim missiles at US anti-missile installations in Europe, which are intended mainly as a shield against Iran, unless the Obama administration agrees to a set of Russian demands. He also threatened a Russian withdrawal from (the START) nuclear arms reduction treaty.”

Fact check

America has well over 1,000 global military bases. Many encircle Russia and China. No nation threatens America. Yet it spends more on “defense” than the rest of the world combined.

To achieve unchallenged global dominance, perpetual wars are waged. Alleged missile defense weapons and tracking radar are for offense. Russia and China are targeted, not Iran or other Middle East countries.

Nuclear-armed Aegis class warships patrol the Eastern Mediterranean, equipped with SM-3 ballistic missiles and anti-satellite interceptors. Upgraded versions are being developed.

Instead of abandoning Bush’s scheme, Obama plans more extensive, sophisticated, flexible, mobile systems to be developed through 2020. Doubling the number of Aegis class warships to 38 will be completed by 2015. They’ll be equipped with state-of-the art missile interceptors for offensive first-strike capability.

Russia’s justifiably furious. During the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, nuclear war was narrowly averted when cooler heads on both sides comprised.

Obama’s no Jack Kennedy. He’s an imperial tool, ravaging the world one country at a time and challenging Russia menacingly with encroachment.

A Final Comment

Under Putin, Russia’s back, proud and re-assertive. It’s not about to roll over for America, especially in Eurasia. Washington’s gone back to the future with a new Cold War. This time it’s for much greater stakes and far larger threats to world peace.

Instead of reporting it, America’s media cheerlead supportively. They blames victims, not Washington’s rogue policies threatening humanity.

In the 1930s, Roosevelt wanted war with Germany and Japan to end America’s Great Depression and achieve US global dominance. During today’s hard times, will Obama follow suit, no matter the potential catastrophe no legitimate leader would risk.

A possibility this frightening and real may be happening in real time as America lurches from one war to another and enacts police state laws quashing dissent.

Nonetheless, the Washington Post accuses Russia of Soviet era saber-rattling when it should be sounding the alarm.

Responsible major media journalism was never America’s long suit. At a time of grave global dangers, they’re pointing fingers the wrong way.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

I’ve written in the past about political parties in Russia, and how little political parties matter when they come into contact with strong regional politicians and oligarchs. This, of course, was based on Henry Hale’s study, “Why Not Parties in Russia?” wherein he discusses why political parties have taken so long to become popular forces in Russia. Is it possible that we are now seeing a change in how political parties act in Russia – perhaps one can suppose that even though political parties are ineffective in swaying the vote in gubernatorial races, they are still vulnerable to populist emotions that work against the party, as seen in United Russia’s drastic losses in Sunday’s parliamentary election? And if this is the case, is it soley because of Putin’s promise to return to the presidency (following a totally clean and fair election) next fall?

The most shocking (and perhaps most expected) outcome of the election was the harassment of election monitors, and their predicted response that they “had observed massive fraud.”  The question, then, is whether the alleged ballot stuffing and intimidation resulted in the gains by the opposition parties (unlikely, though I can’t imagine everyone played fair in the face of United Russia’s perceived supremacy), or if the fraud only kept United Russia slightly ahead of the opposition to retain their majority. As stated by BBC’s Daniel Sandford on Twitter, “it is possible to get less than half the votes and more than half the seats” in Russia’s proportional representative system. According to Ellen Barry of the NY Times, this gives United Russia 53% of the Duma, with only 49.5% of the popular vote.

What does it all mean? Is Putin raging mad? Will he keep Medvedev out of the Prime Minister position after next year’s presidential election? Is he angrily karate-chopping bricks in a dacha in Siberia, and sweating out the bad juju in punishing 6-hour banya sessions? I guess we’ll just have to wait and see…

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood holds anti-Semetic rally, draws thousands at Cairo’s top mosque vowing to ‘one day kill all the Jews’

A Muslim revival at Cairo’s most prominent mosque Friday that drew 5,000 worshippers reportedly turned into a hate-fueled rally, complete with repeated vows to “one day kill all the Jews.”

Led by the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s largest and best-organized political party, the crowd that gathered at the al-Azhar Mosque chanted “Tel Aviv! Tel Aviv! Judgment Day has come!” according to Israeli website Ynetnews.com.

Palestinian guest speakers and spokesmen for the Muslim Brotherhood roused the crowd with speeches aiming to incite Jihad directed at Israel, specifically promoting a “battle against Jerusalem’s Judaization.”

See also:
Cairo rally: One day we’ll kill all Jews
Muslim Brotherhood activists vow to ‘one day kill all Jews’
Islamists Chant “One Day We Will Kill All Jews” at Cairo Rally
‘One day, we’ll kill all the Jews’
Cairo rally: One day we’ll kill all Jews
Ruthless men hide behind veil of religion
ANALYSIS-Islamists strong ahead of Egypt poll, unrest seen an asset
New Clashes as Egypt Prepares for Elections
Egypt: Muslim Brotherhood Versus Army: Disastrous Elections or Bloody Civil War?
Obama Administration supporting objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt

Call Mubarak a dictator, a thug, call him whatever you want, at least he was able to keep a lid on the Muslim Brotherhood and, for the most part, order in the streets. What Egypt has now is rioting in the streets and the Muslim Brotherhood openly advocating genocide against the Jews.

/oh and Parliamentary elections in Egypt are supposed to start Monday, what if the Muslim Brotherhood does well?

Since we had a permit, a police car was there with two policemen. It was really embarrassing that 5 people showed up and 2 policemen waiting for them! Since it was not a “protest” so I decided to enter the embassy to ask about the controversial issues of the right to vote in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

The staff was not there but the guy who stays inside -Mahmoud- opened the door for us. He got us the records of Egyptians who registered themselves, the number was 700, I don’t know if that is good or bad but supposedly 700 Egyptians were granted the right to vote through the embassy in Stockholm.

“When is the last day for the embassy to receive the envelops?” I asked

“Saturday”

“You know that today is Thursday and the application just got uploaded today, which means that the best case scenario of sending the letter today would let you get it here on Monday not putting into consideration that the website goes down for 10 minutes every one hour since it started the registration process”

“Well, you can come to the embassy, we are working on Saturday”

“Yeah, but how about people living out of Stockholm? this is not fair”

“I don’t know, that is all what I know”!

That was the conversation mainly. Disregarding the fact that I am now 100% against this parliamentary elections as it will take place while the SCAF is still in power, I needed to make sure that my point was valid as Egyptians will still not be able to vote.

Harmony Center election poster (Source: AFP/Getty Images)

By Vladimir Socor, Eurasia Daily Monitor, Vol. 8, Iss. 175, Sept 23, 2011 –

As anticipated (see EDM, July 27, 28), Latvia’s parliamentary elections held on September 17 have brought the country to a potentially fateful crossroads. The choice is between consolidating Latvia’s national statehood as part of the West, or empowering the leftist Russian party to undermine those Latvian goals from within a new coalition government. The Russian party, Harmony Center, officially linked with the Kremlin’s United Russia party in a partnership agreement, opposes those Latvian policies that have secured the country’s place within NATO and the EU, and seeks to change them.

For the first time since the restoration of Latvia’s independence 20 years ago, the issue of bringing the Russian party into a coalition government is now on the agenda. It is an unnecessary issue, not warranted by Latvia’s parliamentary arithmetic, but pushed by Moscow, with a confused nod from some residual supporters of European multiculturalism, after this model’s collapse (albeit under different circumstances) in Western Europe itself. In the newly elected Latvian parliament, however, three Western-oriented parties hold enough seats to ensure successful governance, in a negotiable coalition formula. . . .

The Jamestown Foundation: After Elections, Latvia Can Have a Latvian Government Again (Part One)

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, riding a wave of support from the pious poor and newly emergent Muslim middle class, defeated its opponents to hold a majority of parliamentary seats, setting up a third term for Erdogan.

No pressing matter of state like the economy or foreign policy compelled Alayrettin Ayyaldiz to head to a polling station in his modest Istanbul neighborhood Sunday and cast his ballot for Prime MinisterRecep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party. It was a vote of faith and emotion.

“We’re totally connected with our hearts to the AKP,” said the 38-year-old vegetable and fruit vendor, referring to the party’s acronym. “It’s not about what they do. It’s because we love them. They’re of us. They’re of the people.”

The Islamist-rooted party, riding a wave of support from the pious poor and the newly emergent Muslim middle class, handily defeated its opponents to hold a majority of parliamentary seats, setting up a third term for Erdogan, who has been in office since 2003.

However, it fell just short of the 330 seats required to push through constitutional changes that would likely include resolving the country’s painful Kurdish problem by calling for a referendum rather than wrangling with parliament.

“He needs to consult with as broad a coalition as possible to change the constitution,” said Cengiz Aktar, a university professor and journalist. “And on the second-biggest challenge, the Kurdish issue, he also needs to consult. If he gets overconfident and makes his own constitution and his own Kurdish solution, they won’t work.”

For his part, Erdogan struck a conciliatory tone in televised remarks. “The winner of the June 12 elections is our people, whether they voted for the AK Party or not,” he told supporters. “Our nation assigned us to draft the new constitution. They gave us a message to build the new constitution through consensus and negotiation. We will discuss the new constitution with opposition parties, civil society groups and academics. We will seek the broadest consensus.”

Interest in the election was fervent; 81% of eligible voters cast ballots. With 99% of votes counted, unofficial results showed the AKP with just over 50% of the vote and about 325 seats in the 550-seat chamber. Its main rival, the center-left Republican People’s Party, or CHP, won only 25% of the vote, good for 135 seats and better than its 2007 showing but low enough to prompt a leadership change within the organization, analysts say.

The right-wing Nationalist Movement Party appeared to have broken through the 10% hurdle required to gain a block of seats in parliament, with about 13% of the vote and 54 seats, despite a series of sex scandals. Independent candidates mostly representing the country’s Kurdish minority appeared set to win about 36 seats.

In addition to a solid core of pious Turks who voted for the AKP because they identify with its conservative values, voters interviewed in different parts of Istanbul expressed concern about the economy and the issue of resolving the decades-old conflict with ethnic Kurds, who account for a fifth of Turkey’s 75 million people. Constitutional changes championed by the AKP and others would expand the definition of citizenship to include Kurds and other ethnic and religious minorities.

“I am Turkish, but I think the most important issue standing in the way of Turkey’s success is the Kurdish issue,” said Mustafa Ozturk, a 58-year-old printer in central Istanbul.

“The Kurdish issue is the No. 1 problem in our attempt to become more democratic,” said Irfan Yalcin, a 51-year-old graphic designer. “Having this problem and talking about democracy is absurd.”

Few voters discussed Turkey’s longstanding ambition to join the European Union, a reflection of how much the country’s political and economic orientation under Erdogan has shifted toward the eastern lands of the former Ottoman Empire.

Many voters said they were troubled by the rising income disparity of the last few years. Though Turkey’s economy has grown dramatically over the last decade, affluence has been uneven, many complain. “I’m a military officer and I’m driving this taxi on weekends,” said Ahmet Zorlu, when asked about his voting priorities. “That’s enough of an answer.”

But though the AKP espouses economic policies that favor big business and investors, its government has managed to cultivate an image of being close to the working classes. It is close to Islamic charities that help the poor, has improved health services and has launched showy public works projects. Despite the AKP’s pro-business slant, voters said they doubted that any other party would pursue different economic policies.

Those voting against the AKP said they were worried that Erdogan’s ambitions had turned into hubris, that he had created a cult of personality that threatened the very democracy his party had invigorated when it came to power early in the last decade. Erdogan says he plans to transform Turkey’s political system from a European parliamentary model into an American-style presidential system with a strong executive branch.

“If he does what he really wants to do, it will be scary,” said Nilgun Celikbas, a 60-year-old interior designer in the swanky Bebek district of Istanbul who voted against Erdogan. “Right now, we have a picture of prosperity. But in the future, I think he will be dangerous.”

Turkey Parliamentary Election Results 2011