Censure de domaines russes ($6522) · Snippets · GitLab
framagit.org
Framagit

Version longue en français: https://www.bortzmeyer.org/coupure-russie.html

Several ISPs in France have started censoring rt.com via their DNS resolver.

Why are they doing this? I guess officially they’ll say it’s because of Russian propaganda about Ukraine, and that’s partially correct.

But also worth pointing out is that despite very uncritical propaganda from the regime about what happens in Russia, RT is one of the only mass media (non-independent publication) where you can have decent news about social uproar in France (gilets jaunes, anti-police-abuse riots, etc).

We haven’t reached the point where posts to RT are censored on social media (where it’s most popular) so i can’t exactly say we have “one side” to the news yet but it’s getting closer.

This message is both a fuck you to french ISPs engaging in censorship (remember Sci-Hub? TPB?) and a reminder to all the Putin fanboys around here what “there’s only one side to the news” really means: Russia is already there (there’s a few independent publications but they’ve been struggling for years with State censorship and journalist assassinations) and France is getting closer (on the other side of the narrative). The rest of you who live in countries with more free speech can’t even realize what information control means so please don’t take these words lightly.

    • Julianus@lemmy.ml
      0·
      3 years ago

      It’s hilarious that the Azov Battalion was formed from a bunch of racist rednecks because Russia invaded Crimea. And now you use it as the justification to for another invasion? Russia needs to learn to stay in it’s lane.

      As for Wagner Group, it is directly operated as a thinly veiled proxy army. They are a Kremlin asset whose leaders flash Nazi insignia as much as those Azov yokels. I wonder how the Ukrainian denazifacation of Wagner is going in Kyiv? Three foiled assassination attempts so far…

        • Julianus@lemmy.ml
          0·
          3 years ago

          What the west should have done was Marshal Plan eastern Europe. Build them up with loans and investments rather let them wallow in corruption and poverty. Look at Japan and Germany today, compared to Russia. It was a cruel, conscious choice to use them as a cheap labor stock. And now we have to deal with the results: peace in our time? Or checking an aggressor before he starts World War III.

            • Julianus@lemmy.ml
              0·
              3 years ago

              Ha ha, yep, NATO scared Putin so much he invaded an unaligned nation in response. Nobody cares to invade Russia. Russia would be a NATO member, if it wasn’t trapped in the cold war mentality of Putin. What do you get in return? Finland 2.0? Afghanistan 2.0? And a new batch of EU and NATO members. Putin has outmaneuvered himself.

                • Julianus@lemmy.ml
                  0·
                  3 years ago

                  As strong North Korea? They’re totally dependent on China, too. Ukraine is Russia’s next Afghanistan. Remember that fiasco? When American made Stingers cleared the sky of Spetsnaz helicopters? Does that sound familiar?

                • southerntofu@lemmy.mlOP
                  0·
                  3 years ago

                  Ukraine would have become Afghanistan 2.0 if NATO was allowed to take over.

                  Are you saying that western powers were planning a military invasion of Ukraine? This makes no sense, as there was no major military deployment indicating it, nor was there any psyops in the west to mount a narrative justifying such invasion.

    • nachtigall@feddit.de
      0·
      3 years ago

      Wrong facts. NATO’s eastward expansion has been going on since 1959, and we are not living in 1989.

      Between 1959 and 1998 only Spain became a new NATO member (see your own graphic) which I would hardly call eastward expansion 🤨

        • nachtigall@feddit.de
          0·
          3 years ago

          You calling something “hardly” does not matter. After all, Ukraine is also just 1 country by your logic, just like Spain, right?

          My point was rather that Spain is in the far west of Europe and therefore I would hardly call it eastward expansion.

          I meant 1949 and not 1959 to demonstrate NATO expansion

          Makes more sense in that case, especially considering Greece and Turkey.

          Also, I think, one can debate whether German reunification in 1990 counts as expansion since the 2+4 treaty states that no NATO troops may be placed permanently in eastern Germany and as far as I know this was not violated yet.