Re: Soviet "examinations" of Apollo Moon rocks

[Ron]

>
>Is this news from the same Soviet government that said they were not sending
>combat pilots into Korea? Or the same Soviet government that said there was
>no
>radiation leak from Chernobyl? Or the Soviet official sources that insisted
>they were 'winning' in Afganistan right up to the day they left with their
>tails between their legs?
>
>Michael, if the Soviet government apparently could not manage to hold the
>truth
>in their mouths, just why are we supposed to believe their claims of MiGs vs
>Sabres?
>Hmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Well you see Gord, those Soviet pilots were so extremely capable, they managed
to shoot down those Sabres multiple times each. Its that extreme superiority
that explains how they shot down more Sabres than were ever even over there to
begin with.

grin





Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

[Krztalizer]

>Well you see Gord, those Soviet pilots were so extremely capable, they
>managed
>to shoot down those Sabres multiple times each. Its that extreme superiority
>that explains how they shot down more Sabres than were ever even over there
>to
>begin with.

Shhh, Ron - I want to see Mikey's explanation :)

<g>

[Michael Petukhov]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (Michael Petukhov)
> >Date: 1/29/2004 5:07 AM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >Super interesting, very detailed, factual and verifiable
> >material on that scandalous subject can be found at
> >
> >http://www.duel.ru/200348/48_5_1
> >
> >unfortunately in Russian only.
> >
> >Enjoy
> >
> >Michael
> >
> Petukhov, I have watched you attempt to bash all things American for some time.
> I am not a medical professional,

If so why would not you simply shut up? From you pots
one can conclude you are not a professional in any
other field as well.

> but it sure looks as if you have an
> inferiority complex.

Hm.. Yes, I have a complex. But as many russians
I do have supremacy complex. Which is completely understandable
given the proportions of idiots like you around.

>
> It is the only explaination I can come up with when you keep bringing up all
> kinds of off topic subjects where you crow about Soviet/Russian and demean U.S.
> programs.

As for off topic subjects... well I do sometimes but it is common
well established practice in this NG. Just recent:

The State of the Union: Lies about a Dishonest War (409 articles)
Mars Rover Shot (19 articles)
George Soros: "The US now in hands extremists&q... (17 articles)
Winston Churchill As Anthrax Bomber (146 articles)
New virus that's going to be hitting a lot of us (3 articles)

etc.

Moon rocks at least have some connections to aviation and space
research.

And note I am free and see not reasons to behave better than anyone
else does.

Michael
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Matt Wiser]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote:
>
>"Orval Fairbairn" >
>wrote in message
...
>
>>
>> Wasn't Khruschev ousted in 1964? We didn't
>go to the moon until 1969.
>
>Picky Picky , no conspirowhacko ever lets gacts
>get in the way !
>
>Keith
>
>
Keith, how's this for conspiracy wackos: Buzz Aldrin was cornered in L.A.
last year by a very persistent Apollo conspiracy theorist-he's tried to get
every Apollo 11-17 Astronaut to swear on a Bible that the missions actually
happened. This kook cornered Buzz and his daughter and tried to get Buzz
to swear that the mission and Moonwalk happened; and he tried to hem in Buzz
and not let him go until he did it. Buzz responded by punching his lights
out. L.A. County's DA saw a videotape of the incident and ruled Buzz's actions
justified. A pity we can't get Buzz and Mikey to meet-would be interesting.


Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

[Thomas J. Paladino Jr.]

<snip>

> And note I am free and see not reasons to behave better than anyone
> else does.
>

Hmmmm... interesting that you should bring up 'freedom', considering that
yes you are *now* free to post whatever thoughts you may have to the
internet, which, under the old Soviet system you would never have even known
existed.

Such irony.

[Michael Petukhov]

"Thomas J. Paladino Jr." > wrote in message >...
> <snip>
>
> > And note I am free and see not reasons to behave better than anyone
> > else does.
> >
>
> Hmmmm... interesting that you should bring up 'freedom', considering that
> yes you are *now* free to post whatever thoughts you may have to the
> internet, which, under the old Soviet system you would never have even known
> existed.
>
> Such irony.

Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US invention)
kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.

Michael

[Dave Kearton]

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
|
| Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
| known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
| like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
| cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
| a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
| anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
| in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
| known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US
invention)
| kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
| foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
|
| Michael



I understand that television was different in the old USSR as well.


While we in the west would watch the television for entertainment - in the
USSR, the TV watches you.





--


Cheers


Dave Kearton

[Keith Willshaw]

"Dave Kearton" > wrote in
message ...
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> |
> | Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
> | known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
> | like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
> | cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
> | a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
> | anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
> | in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
> | known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US
> invention)
> | kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
> | foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
> |
> | Michael
>
>

Whats really funny is that Micheal has neglected to mention how
paranoid the Soviet authorities were about technology.
Photocopiers and duplicating machines were rigidly
controlled and licensed lest people use them for publishing
counter revolutionary documents and the Fax machines
had them in a real tizzy since with the technology available
the authorities had a hard time listening in and intercepting
fax communications. Indeed it was the explosion in the
numbers of fax machines that was made possible by
Gotbachev's reforms that made organising resistance to the
communist coup of 1991 possible.

In a real sense information technology was one of
the major factors that brought an end to the USSR.

>
> I understand that television was different in the old USSR as well.
>
>
> While we in the west would watch the television for entertainment - in the
> USSR, the TV watches you.
>

The reality of TV in the old USSR was more prosaic. It was
just plain boring. There were few decent arts programmes and
some opera/ballet which were Ok but for the most part it was
incredibly dull. They were quite creative when it came to ensuring
that people only listened to 'approved' radio stations as I recall.
They made really cheap radios that had only presets that were
tuned to the frequencies of government approved stations.

Still most people preferred the news from BBC World Service.

Keith

[Krztalizer]

>under the old Soviet system you would never have even known
>> existed.
>>
>> Such irony.
>
>Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
>known and in use.

.....by all three of the people that could afford computers. Of coures, there
would also be a KGB guy standing over their shoulder, copying down every
website they visited.

>There would be certainly some restrictions
>like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
>cannot significantly stop free spread of information.

If the government can tell you which sites to visit, its not "free spread" of
anything.

> Like
>a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
>anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
>in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies

Right, Comrade... tell us how free it was under the Old System that you knew
and loved so well

>However there is irony indeed that internet (US invention)
>kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
>foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.

Sorta proves that our government doesn't bother trying to restrict access.

[Michael Petukhov]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "Dave Kearton" > wrote in
> message ...
> > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > |
> > | Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
> > | known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
> > | like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
> > | cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
> > | a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
> > | anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
> > | in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
> > | known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US
> invention)
> > | kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
> > | foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
> > |
> > | Michael
> >
> >
>
> Whats really funny is that Micheal has neglected to mention how
> paranoid the Soviet authorities were about technology.

Which technology? USSR was number 1 or number 2 in almost all
technology areas with only possible exception of computers where it was
number 3 or 4.

> Photocopiers and duplicating machines were rigidly
> controlled and licensed lest people use them for publishing
> counter revolutionary documents and the Fax machines
> had them in a real tizzy since with the technology available
> the authorities had a hard time listening in and intercepting
> fax communications.

Well partly true. photocopiers and faxes were not available
in shops for general public. Although it was available
in offices. I am not aware of anyone who wanted to copy
"counter revolutionary documents" at any time. Maybe a very few
so called dissidents which were never more than 200-300 for
all USSR. general public did not cared about any such
documents then and now. I do remmeber that when we wanted
to have copy of Bulgakov novel "Master and Margarite"
possible but very difficult to find in a shop we (10 students)
just typed it and printed in an office printer. As for photocopiers
and faxes, I think it was not available in the shops
simply because at that time it was too big and expansive
mashines and given rather low incomes of population
there would no significant demand.




> Indeed it was the explosion in the
> numbers of fax machines that was made possible by
> Gotbachev's reforms that made organising resistance to the
> communist coup of 1991 possible.

Hm... After all these years we do not so sure there was a "coup"
and "organising resistance". The faxes were already in big
numbers since many privat and state companies certainly had ones
for ages.

>
> In a real sense information technology was one of
> the major factors that brought an end to the USSR.
>
> >
> > I understand that television was different in the old USSR as well.
> >
> >
> > While we in the west would watch the television for entertainment - in the
> > USSR, the TV watches you.
> >
>
> The reality of TV in the old USSR was more prosaic. It was
> just plain boring. There were few decent arts programmes and
> some opera/ballet which were Ok but for the most part it was
> incredibly dull. They were quite creative when it came to ensuring
> that people only listened to 'approved' radio stations as I recall.
> They made really cheap radios that had only presets that were
> tuned to the frequencies of government approved stations.

partly true. Although it was less boring than western TV cud
(particularly in US), in my taste certainly. There was lost of
sports, many good movies and arts and very little politics. Most
people was interesting in mostly their personal lifes, and nobody
was affraid of their future. Anyone could walk at any place of a
town and at any time of day or night. Totally diffrent atmosphere
as it is now in many places. BTW in my house now anyone can watch
any western station for very little fee. And what? Yes no demand
whatsoever. I know because a cable company worker came to ask if
we would like to subscribe and complained nobody wanted and
they probably would have to disconnect all this rubbish.

Michael

>
> Still most people preferred the news from BBC World Service.

No, BBC was not very popular due to its elevated stupidity.
I mean russian branch of BBC. English BBC radio was always
fine. Russian branch was populated mostly by old sick russian
clouns whose the anly advantage was they "selected freedom".
They are all still there and did not learn anything since
that time. Voice of America was indeed rather good and popular.

Michael

>
> Keith

[Michael Petukhov]

(Krztalizer) wrote in message >...
> >under the old Soviet system you would never have even known
> >> existed.
> >>
> >> Such irony.
> >
> >Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
> >known and in use.
>
> ....by all three of the people that could afford computers.
> Of coures, there
> would also be a KGB guy standing over their shoulder, copying down every
> website they visited.

Hm.. Sounds like a paranoya, Gordon. You have not seen
a single KGB guy in person but your trousers are already full.

>
> >There would be certainly some restrictions
> >like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
> >cannot significantly stop free spread of information.
>
> If the government can tell you which sites to visit, its not "free spread" of
> anything.

One have to weight sometimes "free spread of ****" vs. good and
meaningful life, healthy next generations and quiet old age.
I now Gordon you prefer "free spread of ****".

>
> > Like
> >a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
> >anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
> >in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
>
> Right, Comrade... tell us how free it was under the Old System that you knew
> and loved so well

Hm. When I told I love Old System, Gordon? I just say that ordinary
people had a better meaningful life than rather then now
despite of all money opportunities some may have now.
Look Gordon I just bought home theather as a new year present
to my wife. Perfect picture, perfect sound Ffilmateks are full of DVD
of any kind but Gordon there is nothing or almost nothing to see
but Hollywwod **** in unlimited amounts. That's all.
Certainly soviet political and economical system reached its limits
and could not mantain itself any more due to mainly leadership
problems. BTW USA, as far as I can see follows USSR at very high
speed.

>
> >However there is irony indeed that internet (US invention)
> >kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
> >foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
>
> Sorta proves that our government doesn't bother trying to restrict access.

No US gov. is one of most active in this field. Encryption restrictions
for istance, Eshelon project, media is total under gov. control etc.
99% of population is spending every night with Jey Lenno jokes.
what's very boring life indeed!

Michael

[Keith Willshaw]

"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
om...
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Dave Kearton" > wrote in
> > message ...
> > > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > > |
> > > | Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
> > > | known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
> > > | like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
> > > | cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
> > > | a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in
order
> > > | anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
> > > | in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
> > > | known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US
> > invention)
> > > | kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
> > > | foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
> > > |
> > > | Michael
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Whats really funny is that Micheal has neglected to mention how
> > paranoid the Soviet authorities were about technology.
>
> Which technology? USSR was number 1 or number 2 in almost all
> technology areas with only possible exception of computers where it was
> number 3 or 4.
>

Information technology, as a member of a team who gave
a number of talks to various Soviet Ministries in 1988
I can assure you the USSR was not high on the list
of capability.

> > Photocopiers and duplicating machines were rigidly
> > controlled and licensed lest people use them for publishing
> > counter revolutionary documents and the Fax machines
> > had them in a real tizzy since with the technology available
> > the authorities had a hard time listening in and intercepting
> > fax communications.
>
> Well partly true. photocopiers and faxes were not available
> in shops for general public. Although it was available
> in offices. I am not aware of anyone who wanted to copy
> "counter revolutionary documents" at any time. Maybe a very few
> so called dissidents which were never more than 200-300 for
> all USSR. general public did not cared about any such
> documents then and now. I do remmeber that when we wanted
> to have copy of Bulgakov novel "Master and Margarite"
> possible but very difficult to find in a shop we (10 students)
> just typed it and printed in an office printer. As for photocopiers
> and faxes, I think it was not available in the shops
> simply because at that time it was too big and expansive
> mashines and given rather low incomes of population
> there would no significant demand.
>

Strangely every small club, scout troop and students union
in Britain had discovered a need for such equipment and
the cost was quite low. Of course it wasnt a crime here to
have an unlicensed copier.


>
>
>
> > Indeed it was the explosion in the
> > numbers of fax machines that was made possible by
> > Gotbachev's reforms that made organising resistance to the
> > communist coup of 1991 possible.
>
> Hm... After all these years we do not so sure there was a "coup"
> and "organising resistance". The faxes were already in big
> numbers since many privat and state companies certainly had ones
> for ages.
>

Not in 1988 they didnt, we had major problems getting permission
to install one in our Moscow office in 1998


> >
> > In a real sense information technology was one of
> > the major factors that brought an end to the USSR.
> >
> > >
> > > I understand that television was different in the old USSR as well.
> > >
> > >
> > > While we in the west would watch the television for entertainment - in
the
> > > USSR, the TV watches you.
> > >
> >
> > The reality of TV in the old USSR was more prosaic. It was
> > just plain boring. There were few decent arts programmes and
> > some opera/ballet which were Ok but for the most part it was
> > incredibly dull. They were quite creative when it came to ensuring
> > that people only listened to 'approved' radio stations as I recall.
> > They made really cheap radios that had only presets that were
> > tuned to the frequencies of government approved stations.
>
> partly true. Although it was less boring than western TV cud
> (particularly in US), in my taste certainly. There was lost of
> sports, many good movies and arts and very little politics. Most
> people was interesting in mostly their personal lifes, and nobody
> was affraid of their future. Anyone could walk at any place of a
> town and at any time of day or night.

You have to be joking. By 1988 things were easing but during
my first business trip to the USSR in 1974 people were VERY
careful about who they talked frankly to.


> Totally diffrent atmosphere
> as it is now in many places. BTW in my house now anyone can watch
> any western station for very little fee. And what? Yes no demand
> whatsoever. I know because a cable company worker came to ask if
> we would like to subscribe and complained nobody wanted and
> they probably would have to disconnect all this rubbish.
>

Ah a truly objective sample - NOT

Keith

[Krztalizer]

>
>Hm.. Sounds like a paranoya, Gordon. You have not seen
>a single KGB guy in person but your trousers are already full.
>

I have been within yards of KGB warships and the bullnecked stereotype in a
cheap suit that hovered behind Yevgeny Frolov (chief test pilot at Sukhoi at
the time I met him) every time we spoke. As for trousers, I suppose you have
nothing at all in yours, comrade?

>> If the government can tell you which sites to visit, its not "free spread"
>of
>> anything.
>
>One have to weight sometimes "free spread of ****" vs. good and
>meaningful life, healthy next generations and quiet old age.

You need someone in your government to decide what is good enough for you vs
what is not? Goebbels must be smiling in his grave.



>I now Gordon you prefer "free spread of ****".
>

I'm reading your post, proving your point.

>> Right, Comrade... tell us how free it was under the Old System that you
>knew
>> and loved so well
>
>Hm. When I told I love Old System, Gordon?

Oh, please. You practically pine for the old days with every posting you make.
"It was so safe back then", blah blah blah - no wonder it took people like you
70 years to realize your model of government was a travesty.

>I just say that ordinary
>people had a better meaningful life than rather then now
>despite of all money opportunities some may have now.

That's not the US' fault - and if you have forgotten the drudgery under the
Soviet system, the rest of us have not. Russia and the republics will be
paying for their participation in the failed Communist experiment for decades
to come - in ruined land, poisoned citizens, and heartbreak enough for
everyone. Oura poboda!

>Look Gordon I just bought home theather as a new year present
>to my wife. Perfect picture, perfect sound Ffilmateks are full of DVD
>of any kind

Under the Soviet system, you would have to have been one of the privledged
elite to afford such things, and there would always be a chance you would be
publicly denounced for your coveting of foreign products.

>but Gordon there is nothing or almost nothing to see
>but Hollywwod **** in unlimited amounts. That's all.

Let me guess - you don't have a _single_ Hollywood movie in your DVD
collection? Really? ;)

>Certainly soviet political and economical system reached its limits
>and could not mantain itself any more due to mainly leadership
>problems.

Agree.


> BTW USA, as far as I can see follows
> USSR at very high speed.

Probably true. All societies exist like a living organism; all of the great
nations rose and fell before us and there is no reason to believe that our
power will wane in due time. What makes us substantially different than
earlier "superpower states" is that like Phoenicia, our power is largely
economic. Unlike them, we have global superiority in both numbers and quality
of weapons and a technological lead in many areas. That makes us more like the
Romans, who survived a long but tragic history, the same way I believe we will.
But I agree with your position that we will follow the USSR into history at
some point.

>
>No US gov. is one of most active in this field. Encryption restrictions
>for istance, Eshelon project, media is total under gov. control etc.
>99% of population is spending every night with Jey Lenno jokes.
>what's very boring life indeed!

Funny, that claim - behind the open window of this response, AOL is repeatedly
flashing a news headline, "Bush gives in on investigation", so does Blair,
according to the text. I would think a president impervious to our press and
public opinion wouldn't have agreed to an investigation into the CIA intel
debacle unless he felt he had no choice. That is our system working, and its
the difference between the USSR's failure and our success.

Gordon

[Michael Petukhov]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> om...
> > "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > "Dave Kearton" > wrote in
> > > message ...
> > > > "Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
> > > > |
> > > > | Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
> > > > | known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
> > > > | like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
> > > > | cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
> > > > | a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in
> order
> > > > | anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
> > > > | in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
> > > > | known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US
> invention)
> > > > | kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
> > > > | foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
> > > > |
> > > > | Michael
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Whats really funny is that Micheal has neglected to mention how
> > > paranoid the Soviet authorities were about technology.
> >
> > Which technology? USSR was number 1 or number 2 in almost all
> > technology areas with only possible exception of computers where it was
> > number 3 or 4.
> >
>
> Information technology, as a member of a team who gave
> a number of talks to various Soviet Ministries in 1988
> I can assure you the USSR was not high on the list
> of capability.

When and what exactly are you talking about?

>
> > > Photocopiers and duplicating machines were rigidly
> > > controlled and licensed lest people use them for publishing
> > > counter revolutionary documents and the Fax machines
> > > had them in a real tizzy since with the technology available
> > > the authorities had a hard time listening in and intercepting
> > > fax communications.
> >
> > Well partly true. photocopiers and faxes were not available
> > in shops for general public. Although it was available
> > in offices. I am not aware of anyone who wanted to copy
> > "counter revolutionary documents" at any time. Maybe a very few
> > so called dissidents which were never more than 200-300 for
> > all USSR. general public did not cared about any such
> > documents then and now. I do remmeber that when we wanted
> > to have copy of Bulgakov novel "Master and Margarite"
> > possible but very difficult to find in a shop we (10 students)
> > just typed it and printed in an office printer. As for photocopiers
> > and faxes, I think it was not available in the shops
> > simply because at that time it was too big and expansive
> > mashines and given rather low incomes of population
> > there would no significant demand.
> >
>
> Strangely every small club, scout troop and students union
> in Britain had discovered a need for such equipment and
> the cost was quite low. Of course it wasnt a crime here to
> have an unlicensed copier.
>

It was not a crime in USSR as well. But at that time
soviet model of photocopier (huge and heavy, office
format) costed I think in the range of several
10000s of rubbles while average salary was in range
of a few 100s. Foreign cheap portable models were
not allowed for import. Who and why someone would
want to buy it? All this stuff was avaibale office
in big numbers.

>
> >
> >
> >
> > > Indeed it was the explosion in the
> > > numbers of fax machines that was made possible by
> > > Gotbachev's reforms that made organising resistance to the
> > > communist coup of 1991 possible.
> >
> > Hm... After all these years we do not so sure there was a "coup"
> > and "organising resistance". The faxes were already in big
> > numbers since many privat and state companies certainly had ones
> > for ages.
> >
>
> Not in 1988 they didnt, we had major problems getting permission
> to install one in our Moscow office in 1998

Well. we are talking about 1991? My institute as far as I remmeber
always had a fax mashine. I have installed our first email system
in 1990 as far as I rememeber. At that time in Moscow almost every
computer belonging to my friends had a modem and email connection.
Should I remind you that at that time there was no WWW. And most
of western users were just at the same email level. I remmeber
there was a company offering telnet service but the costs were
high and we did not find any reasons to buy that. We simply had
no places to telnet.

>
>
> > >
> > > In a real sense information technology was one of
> > > the major factors that brought an end to the USSR.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I understand that television was different in the old USSR as well.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > While we in the west would watch the television for entertainment - in
> the
> > > > USSR, the TV watches you.
> > > >
> > >
> > > The reality of TV in the old USSR was more prosaic. It was
> > > just plain boring. There were few decent arts programmes and
> > > some opera/ballet which were Ok but for the most part it was
> > > incredibly dull. They were quite creative when it came to ensuring
> > > that people only listened to 'approved' radio stations as I recall.
> > > They made really cheap radios that had only presets that were
> > > tuned to the frequencies of government approved stations.
> >
> > partly true. Although it was less boring than western TV cud
> > (particularly in US), in my taste certainly. There was lost of
> > sports, many good movies and arts and very little politics. Most
> > people was interesting in mostly their personal lifes, and nobody
> > was affraid of their future. Anyone could walk at any place of a
> > town and at any time of day or night.
>
> You have to be joking. By 1988 things were easing but during
> my first business trip to the USSR in 1974 people were VERY
> careful about who they talked frankly to.

I think anyone must be VERY careful about who they talked frankly to.
But I know what you mean. if you are not a plain stupid you had
to quickly understand that the people who had job connected
to foreigners were rather different from the rest of us. It
was a sort of moscow mafia. It was profitable and very
difficult to get job. All these was not due to political
restrictions, even at that time nobody of them cared about
politics. They cared more what they could get from you.
You know what I mean, Keith. Right?

>
>
> > Totally diffrent atmosphere
> > as it is now in many places. BTW in my house now anyone can watch
> > any western station for very little fee. And what? Yes no demand
> > whatsoever. I know because a cable company worker came to ask if
> > we would like to subscribe and complained nobody wanted and
> > they probably would have to disconnect all this rubbish.
> >
>
> Ah a truly objective sample - NOT
>

Maybe not so. But russia still is the only county
I know where you can watch CNN only in foreigner
oriented hotels, and even not in each of it.

Michael

> Keith

[Michael Petukhov]

(Krztalizer) wrote in message >...
> >
> >Hm.. Sounds like a paranoya, Gordon. You have not seen
> >a single KGB guy in person but your trousers are already full.
> >
>
> I have been within yards of KGB warships and the bullnecked stereotype in a
> cheap suit that hovered behind Yevgeny Frolov (chief test pilot at Sukhoi at
> the time I met him) every time we spoke.

So what? he told you he is from KGB or what? Or more likely you just
did not like his face or his nice well trained bullneck. BTW Gordon
what did you, russophobe do with chief test pilot at Sukhoi? Spying?
BTW for your info bullneck was never KGB style. I have not been
there but most likely the guy was a guard only.

>As for trousers, I suppose you have nothing at all in yours, comrade?

sounds very ambiguous for your part. Do you realise that?

>
> >> If the government can tell you which sites to visit, its not "free spread"
> of
> >> anything.
> >
> >One have to weight sometimes "free spread of ****" vs. good and
> >meaningful life, healthy next generations and quiet old age.
>
> You need someone in your government to decide what is good enough for you vs
> what is not?

Depends on the thing and on the goverment, I guess. There are many things
which are not for everyone use. And not only porno which approach now
50% of modern internet.

> Goebbels must be smiling in his grave.

Goebbels committed suicide only because he had no other option
but to surrender to Russians.

>
> >I now Gordon you prefer "free spread of ****".
> >
>
> I'm reading your post, proving your point.
>
> >> Right, Comrade... tell us how free it was under the Old System that you
> knew
> >> and loved so well
> >
> >Hm. When I told I love Old System, Gordon?
>
> Oh, please. You practically pine for the old days with every posting you make.
> "It was so safe back then", blah blah blah - no wonder it took people like you
> 70 years to realize your model of government was a travesty.

I do not think that travesty is right and fair word for that.
Moreover not only you had full trousers in view one KGB agent,
your goverment did many times too.

>
> >I just say that ordinary
> >people had a better meaningful life than rather then now
> >despite of all money opportunities some may have now.
>
> That's not the US' fault - and if you have forgotten the drudgery under the
> Soviet system, the rest of us have not. Russia and the republics will be
> paying for their participation in the failed Communist experiment for decades
> to come - in ruined land, poisoned citizens, and heartbreak enough for
> everyone. Oura poboda!

And what does that mean?

>
> >Look Gordon I just bought home theather as a new year present
> >to my wife. Perfect picture, perfect sound Ffilmateks are full of DVD
> >of any kind
>
> Under the Soviet system, you would have to have been one of the privledged
> elite to afford such things, and there would always be a chance you would be
> publicly denounced for your coveting of foreign products.
>
> >but Gordon there is nothing or almost nothing to see
> >but Hollywwod **** in unlimited amounts. That's all.
>
> Let me guess - you don't have a _single_ Hollywood movie in your DVD
> collection? Really?

Right. Not a single one. although there are some I like.
Capricorn I for instance, is not that bad. Right?
There some others as well JFK for instance is one of my favorite.

;)
>
> >Certainly soviet political and economical system reached its limits
> >and could not mantain itself any more due to mainly leadership
> >problems.
>
> Agree.
>
>
> > BTW USA, as far as I can see follows
> > USSR at very high speed.
>
> Probably true. All societies exist like a living organism; all of the great
> nations rose and fell before us and there is no reason to believe that our
> power will wane in due time. What makes us substantially different than
> earlier "superpower states" is that like Phoenicia, our power is largely
> economic. Unlike them, we have global superiority in both numbers and quality
> of weapons and a technological lead in many areas. That makes us more like the
> Romans, who survived a long but tragic history, the same way I believe we will.
> But I agree with your position that we will follow the USSR into history at
> some point.

Are you serious? This is ridiculus Gordon. US military superiority
ended in the very beginning of 60s when we got enough nukes on duty for
counter strike. Since that time there were no any significant
changes in that field. US can certainly gorge a couple of small
defenceless countries without any significant force support like
Serbs or Iraq. But it is not for free. Every single time the price
is huge, the price is image of your country as fair and strong
supporter of freedome justise in the world. It was simply US
main political capital, which has totally disappeared nowdays.
Totally! You did not noticed Gordon but that's why now US has to
do its dirty job on its own. Very expansive politics.

What else? economy. what stability can economy have with 6 tril
in debts and 521 bil of deficits this year only? Dollar lost 40%
since 2002. All talks about booming US economy last year is no more than
manipulations with numbers. Ask yourself how it can grow at 7% rate
with increasing unimployment. Who did all those 7%.
Catastrophy is coming, catastrophy! Take my good advice
immideately, right now drop everything an go and
convert all your savings into euros, yens, gold diamonds etc or
even russian rubles if they have ones until it is too late.

>
> >
> >No US gov. is one of most active in this field. Encryption restrictions
> >for istance, Eshelon project, media is total under gov. control etc.
> >99% of population is spending every night with Jey Lenno jokes.
> >what's very boring life indeed!
>
> Funny, that claim - behind the open window of this response, AOL is repeatedly
> flashing a news headline, "Bush gives in on investigation", so does Blair,
> according to the text. I would think a president impervious to our press and
> public opinion wouldn't have agreed to an investigation into the CIA intel
> debacle unless he felt he had no choice. That is our system working, and its
> the difference between the USSR's failure and our success.

It was working for some time indeed. But in my view it was working
mainly due strong help from Moscow without which US would never
be able to unite so called West. This was the key. Right? Let's see how does
it can work without such help, on its own. So far results of last
10-15 years are simply catastrophic. Actually all capital US had in
1991 was totally wasted without any significant gains but losses.


Michael
>
> Gordon

[David Windhorst]

Michael Petukhov wrote:

>"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
>
>
>>"Dave Kearton" > wrote in
>>message ...
>>
>>
>>>"Michael Petukhov" > wrote in message
>>>|
>>>| Disagree. If USSR would exist now Internet would be very well
>>>| known and in use. There would be certainly some restrictions
>>>| like those recently reported in China for instance which certainly
>>>| cannot significantly stop free spread of information. Like
>>>| a telephone for instance it is simply too important invention in order
>>>| anyone can ignore or ban it. BTW telephone was pretty well known
>>>| in USSR as well as all other telecommunication technologies
>>>| known in the world. However there is irony indeed that internet (US
>>>
>>>
>> invention)
>>
>>
>>>| kills US propaganda media by free disrtibution of true info and true
>>>| foreign public opinions on US politics in US itself.
>>>|
>>>| Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Whats really funny is that Micheal has neglected to mention how
>>paranoid the Soviet authorities were about technology.
>>
>>
>
>Which technology? USSR was number 1 or number 2 in almost all
>technology areas with only possible exception of computers where it was
>number 3 or 4.
>
>
>
>>snip
>>
I have to hand it to you, Michael -- you're the funniest Russian since
Yakov Smirnov. Speaking of which, if you're ever looking for work,
maybe you could find a job at one of his theaters in Branson --
http://www.yakov.com