Ukraine (cont.)

[Ridgerunner]

This, from another thread, is interesting. Said by the Catholic primate of Ukraine:

“Of course, from the great exultation of seeing off an unworthy president who fled the country at a time of crisis, leaving the Ukrainian Parliament to pick up the pieces and institute an interim executive, and a sense of triumph, we quickly were confronted with the reality of Russian aggression in Crimea, and the comfortable West’s inability to respond to this most dangerous development since World War II.
Then the events in Eastern regions of Ukraine began, fomented again by special operatives from Russia, the “political tourists” in neat uniform, but without any identifying insignia, whom the people have christened “little green men”. And all this time some 40 thousand Russian troops at the border of Ukraine, to further cloud the minds and hearts of those people who had not yet been set free by the “revolution of human dignity.” And the propaganda war unleashed by Russia is the most twisted informational assault since Goebbels pontificated that if you brashly lie long enough, loudly enough some will inevitably believe you.”

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=21356&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CatholicWorldNewsFeatureStories+%28Catholic+World+News+%28on+CatholicCulture.org%29%29

 

[KyrieEleison17]

Asnate, yes, these pro-Putin trolls are found on a lot of internet forums (and you probably see them on Latvian sites as I see them on Ukrainian sites) and it may be surprising to some on CAF but this is a real problem on many news sites on the world wide web with these “paid-to-post” trolls, employed by pro-Putin Kremlin youth groups like Nashi and Molodaya Gvardiya. I’ve seen internet discussions under newspapers’s stories be overwhelmed by the sheer amount and viciousness of the pro-Putin bots or Putinoids as they call them. They are also known as Russia’s 30-Ruble Army.

Back in 2011, Luke Alnnutt wrote:

rferl.org/content/russias_30_ruble_army/2347318.html

By 2012, the same author wrote subsequently:

Russia’s 30-Ruble Army Emerges Again
rferl.org/content/russia_30_ruble_army_emerges_again/24477703.html

And from the article you linked to from England’s Guardian newspaper:

Apart from the book by David Satter on modern-day Russia discussed earlier on this thread, Luke Harding wrote a fantastically revealing book of his days in Russia as the Guardian’s columnist for Russia entitled Expelled: A Journalist’s Descent into the Russian Mafia State about the extent to which Russia’s secret police went to abuse Harding and his wife and children, and the nature of Putin’s state.
books.google.ca/books?id=SbHrF6TJW0UC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Luke+Harding+Expelled&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4PhqU-a5E463yAShkYDYDg&ved=0CDIQuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=Luke%20Harding%20Expelled&f=false

I highly recommend this book, as well as David Satter’s.

We have this in the West too.

Psychological operations (PSYOP) or, as it has been known since 2010, Military Information Support Operations (MISO)[1] are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.[2]

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States

AP: White House defends ‘Cuban Twitter’ to stir unrest

 

[KyrieEleison17]

Anybody can create YouTube videos, and I’m sure Russian disinformation agents are as good at that as they are at other forms of disinformation.

Here’s one of a Berkut agent shooting at Maidan protesters. liveleak.com/view?i=e37_1390291545 Real? Faked? Who knows?

But others would disagree with you that the Berkut shot nobody at the Maidan. bbc.com/news/world-europe-26868119. It is widely believed they did. And why not believe it? They were Yanukovych’s bully boys and many of them went right into the Russian police service when Yanukovych ran off.

And Putin’s people are perfectly capable of hiring thugs of all sorts to do whatever they want them to do, just as Putin supports right wing extremists in the former Soviet colonial states of eastern Europe.

Haaretz, AP : On whose side were the Kiev snipers? Russia and Ukraine trade blame Forensic evidence suggests that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan.

The above article discounts the idea -based on the actual evidence- that the exiled President of Ukraine was responsible for the snipers firing on the protesters and police. The author opines that probably (of course, who else) Putin !] ordered the snipers into the crowd to cause mayhem - even though the article admits that this could only produce outrage against the government of the time, which government was supposed to be a key ally of Putin’s.

“**The government’s new health minister **— a doctor who helped oversee medical treatment for casualties during the protests — told The Associated Press that the similarity of bullet wounds suffered by opposition victims and police indicates the shooters were trying to stoke tensions on both sides and spark even greater violence, with the goal of toppling Yanukovych.”

Even ministers of the new regime had to admit that snipers were shooting at both sides “with the goal of toppling [Ukraine’s President].”

It’s absurd to imagine that President Yanukovych was trying to topple himself.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Haaretz, AP : On whose side were the Kiev snipers? Russia and Ukraine trade blame Forensic evidence suggests that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan.

The above article discounts the idea -based on the actual evidence- that the exiled President of Ukraine was responsible for the snipers firing on the protesters and police. The author opines that probably (of course, who else) Putin !] ordered the snipers into the crowd to cause mayhem - even though the article admits that this could only produce outrage against the government of the time, which government was supposed to be a key ally of Putin’s.

“**The government’s new health minister **— a doctor who helped oversee medical treatment for casualties during the protests — told The Associated Press that the similarity of bullet wounds suffered by opposition victims and police indicates the shooters were trying to stoke tensions on both sides and spark even greater violence, with the goal of toppling Yanukovych.”

Even ministers of the new regime had to admit that snipers were shooting both sides “with the goal of toppling [Ukraine’s President].”

It’s absurd to imagine that President Yanukovych was trying to topple himself.

On the other hand, it may be that Yanukovych thought he could stop the protests by sending snipers after them. Just because he’s a betrayer of his people does not mean he’s a smart one.

And if, indeed, the fine, thin hand of Putin was in it, there is no particular reason to think him incapable of creating chaos that Yanukovych couldn’t control. Putin could have seen the people turned against Yanukovych in large numbers. Putin might have decided Yanukovych had outlived his usefulness. How did Solzhenitsyn put the sometimes harsh abandonment of its betrayer/helpers by the KGB? “A traitor is like a ferryman. Once he has done what you wanted him to do, you don’t need him anymore.”

And, again, one has to ask who profited. Russia has stolen and annexed Crimea, and threatens to annex more of Ukraine. That’s just a fact, and no amount of rationalization will change the nature of it.

 

[KyrieEleison17]

On the other hand, it may be that Yanukovych thought he could stop the protests by sending snipers after them. Just because he’s a betrayer of his people does not mean he’s a smart one.

There is no evidence to support this accusation. Even the new regime’s authorities have admitted that the action was aimed at toppling President Yanukovych and his government.

Moreover, barely hours before President Yanukovych had signed an international agreement that included a clause explicitly refusing to use any Ukrainian police to attack protesters in any way, only allowing them to protect physical government property. That was an outrageous thing for all the parties involved to include obviously as that meant not only the ministers and members of the government but the entire population would not be protected by police.

And if, indeed, the fine, thin hand of Putin was in it,

Oh give it a rest.

there is no particular reason to think him incapable of creating chaos that Yanukovych couldn’t control.

That is an outrageous falsehood. There is every reason to deny Putin would have done it because doing it benefited him exactly nothing but lost him a key regional partner and resulted in a dangerous, hostile and virtually anarchistic state sitting on his doorstep and poised to throw itself into the arms of NATO.

Putin could have seen the people turned against Yanukovych in large numbers. Putin might have decided Yanukovych had outlived his usefulness.

“could” “might”

Your theory might have been plausible if Putin could have had any chance or hope of controlling the outcome such that another likely pro-Russian supporter would come to power. This was not even a remote possibility.

How did Solzhenitsyn put the sometimes harsh abandonment of its betrayer/helpers by the KGB? “A traitor is like a ferryman. Once he has done what you wanted him to do, you don’t need him anymore.”

Putin wanted Ukraine to be a neutral buffer state. On account of the action of killers on the Maidan, this possibility has been almost entirely eliminated.

And, again, one has to ask who profited.

Bingo! Let’s actually do that rather than just demonizing Putin.

How about this scenario:

Radical right-wingers who are on the political margins of the country with little to no hope of being anything else (as they are equally detested by both the pro-EU side and the pro-Russia side) - having at most 10% of the popular support - take the opportunity of a crisis to seize some control, influence and power, which otherwise they could never had gained - least of all by elections, which were planned in the last agreement signed by President Yanukovych to take place sooner.

Okay. So Russia doesn’t want these guys in power, the vast majority of Ukrainians don’t and the West doesn’t want them either because they are not team players but hyper-nationalists. Their prospects aren’t looking so good. Now during the Maidan crisis there was simultaneous national and international dialogue taking place to cool the crisis; however, the sudden and extremely ferocious and violent assault on both protesters and police alike undid any and all of this progress made.

Now today we see a party with barely any popular domestic or international support occupying key positions in the new government, which party is known for its private militias and is quite proud of its provocative actions on the Maidan and its deliberate escalations for the sake of the “national revolution”.

So an obscure, extremist faction suddenly enjoys otherwise unthinkable representation and influence in Ukraine’s government. Neither Russia nor the West wants these guys in power. The Ukrainian population never gave them popular support.

So who benefits?

Maybe if we could move past the East-West mud flinging we might see that those responsible for the mayhem might just be those who most gained from it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There is no evidence to support this accusation. Even the new regime’s authorities have admitted that the action was aimed at toppling President Yanukovych and his government.

Moreover, barely hours before President Yanukovych had signed an international agreement that included a clause explicitly refusing to use any Ukrainian police to attack protesters in any way, only allowing them to protect physical government property. That was an outrageous thing for all the parties involved to include obviously as that meant not only the ministers and members of the government but the entire population would not be protected by police.
That is an outrageous falsehood. There is every reason to deny Putin would have done it because doing it benefited him exactly nothing but lost him a key regional partner and resulted in a dangerous, hostile and virtually anarchistic state sitting on his doorstep and poised to throw itself into the arms of NATO.

“could” “might”

Your theory might have been plausible if Putin could have had any chance or hope of controlling the outcome such that another likely pro-Russian supporter would come to power. This was not even a remote possibility.

Putin wanted Ukraine to be a neutral buffer state. On account of the action of killers on the Maidan, this possibility has been almost entirely eliminated.

Bingo! Let’s actually do that rather than just demonizing Putin.

How about this scenario:

Radical right-wingers who are on the political margins of the country with little to no hope of being anything else (as they are equally detested by both the pro-EU side and the pro-Russia side) - having at most 10% of the popular support - take the opportunity of a crisis to seize some control, influence and power, which otherwise they could never had gained - least of all by elections, which were planned in the last agreement signed by President Yanukovych to take place sooner.

Okay. So Russia doesn’t want these guys in power, the vast majority of Ukrainians don’t and the West doesn’t want them either because they are not team players but hyper-nationalists. Their prospects aren’t looking so good. Now during the Maidan crisis there was simultaneous national and international dialogue taking place to cool the crisis; however, the sudden and extremely ferocious and violent assault on both protesters and police alike undid any and all of this progress made.

Now today we see a party with barely any popular domestic or international support occupying key positions in the new government, which party is known for its private militias and is quite proud of its provocative actions on the Maidan and its deliberate escalations for the sake of the “national revolution”.

So an obscure, extremist faction suddenly enjoys otherwise unthinkable representation and influence in Ukraine’s government. Neither Russia nor the West wants these guys in power. The Ukrainian population never gave them popular support.

So who benefits?

Maybe if we could move past the East-West mud flinging we might see that those responsible for the mayhem might just be those who most gained from it.

It’s not East-West mudslinging, it’s distrust of a KGB colonel who has in no way proven that he’s in any way different from what it ever took to be a KGB colonel. It might be a good idea to really study its history, methodology and personalities.

And who profits from Putin’s seizure of Crimea? Not some right wingers in Kiev, that’s for sure. Putin and his supporters profit, just as they would be the ones to profit if they seized eastern and southern Ukraine. Oligarchic kleptocracy does not necessary stop at the Russian border.

This really isn’t a “right-left-middle” struggle either. Putin supports fascist extremist groups in Europe. foreignaffairs.com/articles/141067/mitchell-a-orenstein/putins-western-allies

Possibly his support of neo-fascist groups is intended to destabilize. Possibly it’s to have a bogeyman to point at, and, when you really look at it, his regime is precisely the sort of thing those groups want to put in power.

 

[Ridgerunner]

We have this in the West too.

Psychological operations (PSYOP) or, as it has been known since 2010, Military Information Support Operations (MISO)[1] are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.[2]

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States

AP: White House defends ‘Cuban Twitter’ to stir unrest

Why are you persuaded that the West engages in psychological warfare, yet resist the idea that Putin (who was trained in it) doesn’t?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Your theory might have been plausible if Putin could have had any chance or hope of controlling the outcome such that another likely pro-Russian supporter would come to power. This was not even a remote possibility.

.

Who says Putin wanted to control the outcome in all of Ukraine? Maybe he only wanted parts of Ukraine, like, oh, Crimea as part of Russia, for example; perhaps eastern and southern Ukraine as well.

 

[DaveBj]

Who says Putin wanted to control the outcome in all of Ukraine? Maybe he only wanted parts of Ukraine, like, oh, Crimea as part of Russia, for example; perhaps eastern and southern Ukraine as well.

I was listening to some analysts on NPR today, and they were saying that what Putin wants is a Ukraine that leans toward Russia, but if Putin follows his annexation of Crimea with a carving off and annexation of eastern Ukraine, what will be left is a rump Ukraine that will be solidly in Europe’s camp. That will not be what he wants, but I’m not sure that being a KGB colonel made him smart enough to read the borsht dregs.

 

[Ridgerunner]

In the interests of understanding Russia.

economist.com/node/9682621

"Over the two terms of Mr Putin’s presidency, that “group of FSB operatives” has consolidated its political power and built a new sort of corporate state in the process. Men from the FSB and its sister organisations control the Kremlin, the government, the media and large parts of the economy—as well as the military and security forces. According to research by Olga Kryshtanovskaya, a sociologist at the Russian Academy of Sciences, a quarter of the country’s senior bureaucrats are siloviki—a Russian word meaning, roughly, “power guys”, which includes members of the armed forces and other security services, not just the FSB. The proportion rises to three-quarters if people simply affiliated to the security services are included. These people represent a psychologically homogeneous group, loyal to roots that go back to the Bolsheviks’ first political police, the Cheka. **As Mr. Putin says repeatedly, “There is no such thing as a former Chekist”**By many indicators, today’s security bosses enjoy a combination of power and money without precedent in Russia’s history.
All important decisions in Russia, says Ms Kryshtanovskaya, are now taken by a tiny group of men who served alongside Mr Putin in the KGB and who come from his home town of St Petersburg. In the next few months this coterie may well decide the outcome of next year’s presidential election. But whoever succeeds Mr Putin, real power is likely to remain in the organisation. Of all the Soviet institutions, the KGB withstood Russia’s transformation to capitalism best and emerged strongest. “Communist ideology has gone, but the methods and psychology of its secret police have remained,” says Mr Kondaurov, who is now a member of parliament. "

Brave people. But then, there are sometimes brave people in fascist states, at least for awhile.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I was listening to some analysts on NPR today, and they were saying that what Putin wants is a Ukraine that leans toward Russia, but if Putin follows his annexation of Crimea with a carving off and annexation of eastern Ukraine, what will be left is a rump Ukraine that will be solidly in Europe’s camp. That will not be what he wants, but I’m not sure that being a KGB colonel made him smart enough to read the borsht dregs.

Hard to know what Putin has in mind. After all, who, during the Sochi Olympics, thought Putin’s very next move would be to annex Crimea?

One has to remember that eastern and southern Ukraine contain most of Ukraine’s industry, a very substantial part of its best agricultural land, its best “fracking” areas and the totality of its access to any ocean at all. A “rump state” in Western Ukraine would be solidly in Europe’s camp in a way, but it would also be a very poor one. Economically, and stripped of its industry, resources and world access, it would make Greece look good. Possibly that would suit Putin just fine.

 

[DaveBj]

Hard to know what Putin has in mind. After all, who, during the Sochi Olympics, thought Putin’s very next move would be to annex Crimea?

One has to remember that eastern and southern Ukraine contain most of Ukraine’s industry, a very substantial part of its best agricultural land, its best “fracking” areas and the totality of its access to any ocean at all. A “rump state” in Western Ukraine would be solidly in Europe’s camp in a way, but it would also be a very poor one. Economically, and stripped of its industry, resources and world access, it would make Greece look good. Possibly that would suit Putin just fine.

That could be what he’s thinking. Personally, I keep hoping that all this comes back to bite him in the butt. But then, that might make him mad, like the bears he loves to rassle, and nobody likes to be around an angry bear.

In Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan universe, the post-Soviet Russia became America’s friend. As a former USSR analyst, that’s what I would have liked to happen, but unfortunately, Putin apparently didn’t read Clancy’s script.

 

[JimG]

That could be what he’s thinking. Personally, I keep hoping that all this comes back to bite him in the butt. But then, that might make him mad, like the bears he loves to rassle, and nobody likes to be around an angry bear.

In Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan universe, the post-Soviet Russia became America’s friend. As a former USSR analyst, that’s what I would have liked to happen, but unfortunately, Putin apparently didn’t read Clancy’s script.

Apparently not. Russia is beefing up its nuclear deterrent, while the U.S. has been downsizing, and is considering downsizing even further. Less U.S. deterrence means Putin will not be deterred.

 

[Tomdstone]

…there are sometimes brave people in fascist states, at least for awhile.

I agree. The Russian speaking people in Eastern Ukraine have been very brave while the illegal Ukrainian government, supported by the fascist Right Sector, has been attacking innocent civilians in this area. I don’t know how long these brave Russian speaking Ukrainians can last as there have been calls from the Right Sector pro-maidan group to exterminate all Jews and all Russian speaking Ukrainians.
gizadeathstar.com/2014/04/ukrainian-leader-tymoshenko-wants-kill-8000000-russians-nukes/
whatdoesitmean.com/index1744.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=C5EXdbzIDEk

 

[Tomdstone]

In Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan universe, the post-Soviet Russia became America’s friend. As a former USSR analyst, that’s what I would have liked to happen, but unfortunately, Putin apparently didn’t read Clancy’s script.

Are you sure it was not the fault of the USA that has resulted in a new cold war?

 

[colmywaykurtz]

What evidence do they have that the FSB and its sister organizations control the armed forces?

In the interests of understanding Russia.

economist.com/node/9682621

"Over the two terms of Mr Putin’s presidency, that “group of FSB operatives” has consolidated its political power and built a new sort of corporate state in the process. Men from the FSB and its sister organisations control the Kremlin, the government, the media and large parts of the economy—as well as the military and security forces. According to research by Olga Kryshtanovskaya, a sociologist at the Russian Academy of Sciences, a quarter of the country’s senior bureaucrats are siloviki—a Russian word meaning, roughly, “power guys”, which includes members of the armed forces and other security services, not just the FSB. The proportion rises to three-quarters if people simply affiliated to the security services are included. These people represent a psychologically homogeneous group, loyal to roots that go back to the Bolsheviks’ first political police, the Cheka. **As Mr. Putin says repeatedly, “There is no such thing as a former Chekist”**By many indicators, today’s security bosses enjoy a combination of power and money without precedent in Russia’s history.
All important decisions in Russia, says Ms Kryshtanovskaya, are now taken by a tiny group of men who served alongside Mr Putin in the KGB and who come from his home town of St Petersburg. In the next few months this coterie may well decide the outcome of next year’s presidential election. But whoever succeeds Mr Putin, real power is likely to remain in the organisation. Of all the Soviet institutions, the KGB withstood Russia’s transformation to capitalism best and emerged strongest. “Communist ideology has gone, but the methods and psychology of its secret police have remained,” says Mr Kondaurov, who is now a member of parliament. "

Brave people. But then, there are sometimes brave people in fascist states, at least for awhile.

 

[KyivAndrew]

I agree. The Russian speaking people in Eastern Ukraine have been very brave while the illegal Ukrainian government, supported by the fascist Right Sector, has been attacking innocent civilians in this area. I don’t know how long these brave Russian speaking Ukrainians can last as there have been calls from the Right Sector pro-maidan group to exterminate all Jews and all Russian speaking Ukrainians.
gizadeathstar.com/2014/04/ukrainian-leader-tymoshenko-wants-kill-8000000-russians-nukes/
whatdoesitmean.com/index1744.htm
youtube.com/watch?v=C5EXdbzIDEk

You know, this is just plain ridiculous, posting Kremlin propaganda and lies and Conspiracy News on a Catholic news Forum! One of your links, the second, claims Yulia Tymoshenko is a neo-Nazi and the first link relies on a doctored Tymoshenko tape conversation. Unbelievable, but why should I be surprised when the link you are relying on is a CONSPIRACY SITE run by someone called Dr. Joseph Farrell called gizadeathstar as evidence for your claims on Ukraine.

I’m Ukrainian, and you Tombdstone are going to argue against today’s Ukraine using for support some author whose conspiracy website includes articles on ALCHEMY, ROSWELL, NAZIS, GENETICS, Secret Space Programs and a Breakaway Civilization, that the Allies may have helped Hitler escape after WW2, and a whole section entitled CONSPIRACY. Do you believe in this stuff too?

Funnily enough, members of the KGB/FSB and their conspiratorial thinking would buy into some of this weird conspiracy stuff as well, but, we are on a Catholic Forum, and you are not going to convince me that I should take a UFO conspiracy site as authoritative on something like Ukraine. Why would a site on Roswell, bankers, conspiracies and UFOs be a legitimate source in your eyes Tombdstone for information on Ukraine?

I don’t even know if CAF rules support linking to conspiracy sites, but you have.

This is a long thread but if you think conspiracy sites like this are legitimate for discussing today’s Ukraine…

 

[KyivAndrew]

It’s not East-West mudslinging, it’s distrust of a KGB colonel who has in no way proven that he’s in any way different from what it ever took to be a KGB colonel. It might be a good idea to really study its history, methodology and personalities.

And who profits from Putin’s seizure of Crimea? Not some right wingers in Kiev, that’s for sure. Putin and his supporters profit, just as they would be the ones to profit if they seized eastern and southern Ukraine. Oligarchic kleptocracy does not necessary stop at the Russian border.

This really isn’t a “right-left-middle” struggle either. Putin supports fascist extremist groups in Europe. foreignaffairs.com/articles/141067/mitchell-a-orenstein/putins-western-allies

Possibly his support of neo-fascist groups is intended to destabilize. Possibly it’s to have a bogeyman to point at, and, when you really look at it, his regime is precisely the sort of thing those groups want to put in power.

 

[DaveBj]

Are you sure it was not the fault of the USA that has resulted in a new cold war?

Conducting a cold war, like dancing the tango, requires two. Putin is certainly contributing his share of the tension. From our side, I would say that the main problem is that Ronald Reagan is 25 years out of office.

 

[KyivAndrew]

From the Washington Post:

“We were told repeatedly that our forces by the Ukrainian border were a source of concern,” Putin said on Wednesday. “We have withdrawn our forces and they are now not on the Ukrainian border but are carrying out their regular exercises at the test grounds.”

The announcement was welcomed: The sheer scale of Russian troops on the borders had been a real cause of concern. But some United States officials were quick to voice skepticism. “To date, there has been no evidence that such a withdrawal has taken place," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said.

Now on Friday, the United States Mission to NATO has taken to Twitter to show new satellite images that it claims are proof Putin is lying:

washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/09/russia-said-it-moved-its-troops-away-from-ukraine-satellite-images-seem-to-say-otherwise/

(emphasis mine)

By now, I think it should be clear that Vladimir Putin cannot and should not be trusted to tell the truth. He earnestly proclaimed Russian military forces were not involved in the invasion and annexation of Crimea, only later to admit the exact same thing. Now he and his KGB clique running Russia lie and say they have withdrawn their large military on Ukraine’s border, on top of all the other lies they propagate about Ukraine and Ukrainians.

I don’t think Putin lying should be taken as an aberration in behaviour but it should be taken as something that comes naturally to an unrepentant KGB agent. The KGB didn’t teach bullies like Putin that truth-telling was a virtue; it taught him that lying, deception, and blackmail can all be virtues in the cause of serving the Kremlin. If anybody disagrees, please show me where that organ of state repression the KGB was ever a humanitarian and truthful institution.