documentaries, latest, Russia

WATCH: Who Are These Russians And Why Do We Hate Them?

In his film, Regis Tremblay examines the history of US-Russian relations, talks to ordinary Russian people, deconstructs propaganda and attempts to answer the question – Who are these Russians? And Why Do We Hate Them?

The escalating downturn of US relations with Russia has made the world a more dangerous place than at any time during the Cold War, including during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

This film explores the many reasons why the US foreign policy establishment since the end of World War II hates all things Russian. With the exception of John Kennedy who sought to end nuclear weapons and to seek peace with Russia, every president since has used Russia as a threat to American interests, security and Democracy.

Is Putin a thug and an assassin? Or he is a great, patriotic leader of a country that was nearly destroyed by President George Herbert Walker Bush’s CIA good old boys, Bill Clinton and the CIA asset Boris Yeltsin? But, perhaps the greatest fear is that Russia has regained its superpower status and because of the sanctions, has established close economic, diplomatic, political and military relations with China and the BRICS nations. And this is the biggest threat to American hegemony and capitalist interests around the world.

Nearly thirty years have past since the fall of the Soviet Union and still America and the West refuse to believe that Communism is dead and that Russia now embraces a market economy and most of the political and social values of the West. Thanks to Putin, Russia is again a global superpower and a threat to American hegemony and interests.

As citizens of this country, we have a responsibility for its actions. It is my hope that as Americans, we can accept the truth of our past and acknowledge the errors of our present course so that we can take our rightful place as one among equals with the rest of the world.


  1. From the heading of his article I guessed that Regis Tremblay must be a Yank. Most countries _know_ “Who are the Russians” and do _not_ “hate them”. Mental conditioning into a public state of casual malevolence based on deliberate ignorance is a characteristic peculiar to the inhabitants of modern “Dumbed Down” U$A.

    • Portonchok says

      Most of my Brits have been conditioned this way too. It’s been a long propaganda war against them. Capped with the ridiculous, childish Salisbury novichok false flag open-air theatre.

  2. Another reason why the Anglo Zio Capitalists would love us to hate Putin is, that Russia has frustrated the AZC plan to partition Syria and take over Syria’s water, agricultural and hydrocarbon reserves. Uncle $cam’s spoilt brat of a nephew, Little Izzie, used to bomb Syria every 2 days with impunity! Now Putin has installed the Russian S-300 Air Defense System, and Izzie is throwing a hissie and Uncle is cross. Today’s analysis by The Saker:

    “Judging by their past attacks against Syria, the US and the Israelis are far more concerned with the need to appear very powerful, effective and quasi-invulnerable than by actually achieving some meaningful military objective. Of course, this need to appear invulnerable also means that the AngloZionists really cannot afford to have one of their aircraft shot down, hence their current reluctance to test out the [new] Syrian air defense capabilities [from Russia].

    The problem for the Israelis is that they don’t really have any good options. The problem is not so much a technological one as it is a political one.

    Let’s assume that the Israelis conduct a successful strike against a meaningful target (if their attack is symbolic, the Russians and Syrians can just limit their reply to the usual protests and denunciations, but take no real action). What would Russia do? Well, the Russians (Shoigu specifically) have already indicated that, if needed, they would increase the number of S-300 batteries (and required support systems) delivered to Syria. Thus, the main effect of a successful attack on Syria will be to make subsequent attacks even harder to plan and execute. If you were Syrian (or Iranian), would you not want the Israelis to strike Syria (or even S-300 batteries) hard enough to force the Russians to deliver even more air defense systems (not necessarily S-300s by the way!)?

    Just as with the case of Hezbollah in Lebanon (which the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 helped create), and the coming to power of Hassan Nasrallah at the head of Hezbollah (which the murder of Abbas al Moussawi by the Israelis in 1992 propelled to the position of Secretary General of the organization), the Israelis are re-discovering again and again the truism: while simple, brute force violence does appear to be effective in the short term, in the mid to long-term it always fails unless backed by meaningful political measures.

    The big axiomatic truth is that _all true security is always collective (something the Russians have been repeating for years now)_.

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      Israel murdered Moussawi along with his family, in a pretty typical effort where sparing women and children only draws cynical garbage about ‘moral purity’. Yet they created a scourge for their own back in promoting Nasrallah, who may prove their Nemesis.

    • Portonchok says

      Anti-Putinism and Russophobia is a much deeper issue than that. It’s a war to eventually physically seize the vast natural assets worth perhaps $100 trillion.

      This is plunder, by their own NATO jackboots or by engineering another Kiev revolution and having the likes of Khordokovsky and other Atlanticists sell off Russia’s vast wealth to Wall Street and political zionists.

      They will even go nuclear if they deem it to be necessary to their interests. Such people are sheer evil, make no mistake about it. They will not stop.

      • Rhisiart Gwilym says

        That’s assuming that ‘such people’ are something more like superheroes than what Ben Elton used to call ‘little farties’. Never seen any sign of that. Little farties they all are, just like the rest of us. No need to frighten ourselves by investing them with imagined demonic-giant stature, when actually they’re just piddling inept twerps; ripe for slapping down comprehensively by the geo-physical crises now blowing up around the world. The wretched global class of wealthpowerstatus-addict farties will be reduced to grovelling submission by those nemeses, just like the rest of us: forces majeures on steriods.

  3. Jen says

    The really curious thing is if we go back some 150 years in US history, we find that the United States and Russia (in the form of the Russian empire) were actually friendly nations.

    The Russians undertook to defend California and New York during the US Civil War to prevent a possible British or British-allied invasion from the Pacific. This was at a time when the British were secretly assisting the breakaway Confederate States of America with a view to wrenching that potential country away from the US. The idea behind that being that a divided nation would be weakened enough by civil war to be taken over and democracy finally quashed.

    In the end the US survived but its President didn’t. In 1881, the Russian tsar was assassinated.

    There are some who believe that the assassinations of both President Lincoln in 1865 and Tsar Alexander II in 1881 were the work of British intelligence and British-assisted terrorists.

    The possibility then is that US attitudes toward Russia changed due to British influence and interference in American affairs in the decades after 1865. The British treatment of Russia as an enemy and an imperial rival goes back at least to the mid-1700s when Russia acquired territory (and Crimea in particular) on the Black Sea.

  4. Makropulos says

    One interesting aspect to the latest mutation of the Western manure machine is that it can no longer talk about “communism”. Now back in the “good old” Cold War days you could have an intellectual gloss on the anti-Russian blather precisely by talking about how communism could – allegedly – never work, how it would always – allegedly – lead to totalitarianism etc. What have you got now? Well – those Russkies are …..just….bad. Nasty. Just….evil. Putin – bad bad man. etc.

    • Mulga Mumblebrain says

      ‘Communism’ or ‘socialism’ is just cant, words that trigger Pavlovian slobbering and screeching in Rightwing psychopaths. They exist to hate, steal and destroy, and ‘enemies’ must, and will, always be found. Any system that attempts to provide a decent life for all, not just a privileged class or tribal elite, is particularly hated, and marked for extermination.

  5. Gwyn says

    I know this is very childish of me, and I know that the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs is far too professional and mature to even contemplate such a thing, but I’d love to see a no-holds-barred physical confrontation between Sergey Lavrov and Gavin ”Shut up and go away” Williamson.

    I’d imagine that the pipsqueak Williamson would be shutting his mouth pretty bloody sharpish, and running away as fast as his little legs would carry him.

    • Jen says

      Gavin Williamson’s proper counterpart in Russia is Sergey Shoigu. Believe me, when you see a photo of Shoigu, you definitely would not wish to cross swords with this man.

      Not only because Shoigu actually has military experience and even collects swords but also because he appears a well-rounded and highly educated man.

      All Williamson has to match wits and fists against Shoigu is that pet tarantula of his.

      • Gwyn says

        I stand corrected, Jen. How Mr Shoygu must quake in his boots when he thinks about his counterpart, the utterly terrifying Williamson.

        • Mulga Mumblebrain says

          Williamson IS terrifying. The thought that a sub-normal buffoon like him is the Defence Minister of a nuclear power is truly terrifying.

        • Jen says

          By golly you’re right, Gavin Williamson truly is terrifying.

          From the marginally less terrifying Murdoch rag The Sun:

          “FARMAGEDDON Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson has ‘lost the plot’ over barmy plan to put guns on tractors

          Other crazy ideas include disguising mobile missile defence systems as Coca-Cola lorries and transforming old commercial ferries into beach assault craft …

          … As the MoD struggles to deal with a budget black hole, Williamson has been accused of hatching a series of crackpot schemes to solve an equipment crisis.

          According to several senior sources they include:

          – MOUNTING “really expensive guns” on tractors and disguising mobile missile defence ­systems as Coca-Cola lorries;
          – BUYING old commercial ferries and transforming them into beach assault craft, and;
          – WASTING thousands of hours of civil service time on plans to launch his own medal

          One insider said staff are at their wits’ end with Williamson, who insists on keeping a pet tarantula called Cronus in his MoD office.

          The source added: “We need billions and serious ideas to tackle serious problems.

          “Yet Williamson is mucking about with his spider and coming up with crazy suggestions. The man is out of his mind.

          “His behaviour is totally bizarre and no one knows what to do.”…

          Next thing you know, he’ll propose using kindergartens and childcare centres to draft people into the armed forces to make up for the shortfalls in recruits … people as young as babies, that is …

  6. We hate Russians? When on earth will the people take their power back from political tyrants? They want us all fighting or dead. They hate the people.
    This is in the Ukraine. The country we openly propped up the Nazi party to kill Russians.

  7. harry stotle says

    One of the intriguing questions in Regis Tremblay’s illuminating film is why, despite a horrific catalogue of aggression and violence, Americans, or citizens in many other parts of the world, cannot see these crimes for what they really are.

    Tremblay attempts to answer his own rhetorical question in this essay but while it contains fascinating insights it still does not quite hit the nail on the head when it comes to explaining why the US keep getting away with it with relatively low levels of domestic or international disgust.

    In the final stages of his illness Harold Pinter raged about the same theme (the world’s blindness to American foreign policy) highlighting an urgent necessity for historians and social commentators to properly document their egregious behaviour especially when it came to a long standing pattern of flouting international norms.

    To me things seem just as bad as ever especially when I recall the Identity Politics crowd at the Guardian practically throwing themselves under a bus after Obama stepped down – being a person of colour or sounding like Morgan Freeman in no way dilutes the war crimes committed by this ambitious phoney.

    Instead of a period of sober reflection and analysis after Obama was awarded the nobel peace prize the Guardian regulars immediately started baying for his successor, the butcher of Tripoli, and by that I mean Hillary Rodham Clinton not Colonel Gaddafi – on a quiet day I imagine regular columinist high-five amongst themselves whenever they hear about an individual or group who stand up to the Empire being made to suffer in some way (the propaganda war against Assange epitomises their true colours).

    Examples to set the public record straight with US black-ops in Syria, Venezuela, and of course the Ukraine have all been met with articles which invariably read like a security briefing.

    • Gezzah Potts says

      Mainstream Media. Lowlife maggot cretinous loathsome paid presstitutes for Empire and Imperialism. The lowest of the low. All in their craven service to the Anglo Zionist vampiric war machine. Their hysterical denunciations of Russia and Putin have pushed the World to the brink.

  8. vexarb says

    War and Peace, “the best novel”. “”A novel in which History is the main character”. Have just come, for the first tfme, to Borodino — a Napoleonic placename which you will _not_ find on the Arc de Triomphe nor on a railway station in Paris nor twinned with any town in France.

    “Able was I ere I saw Borodino”. Where the Russian bear chewed up most of Napoleon’s Grande Armee, leaving a few tattered and badly battered remnants limping off to meet their Waterloo.

    Sounds familiar? If not, do what I did in 2013 and search the historic Hitlerian placename, Kursk. Where the Russian bear chewed up 80% of the Natzi War Might, leaving its tattered and badly battered remnants to limp Westwards for a quick and easy mopping up by the fresh and rested Anglo Army.

    Ah, says NATZO, but that was history, the future will be different. Third time Lucky!

    • Antonym says

      Napoleon and Hitler were quite different: the former diminished the power of the Church and the aristocracy greatly while modernizing society. Hitler saw any Slavs or Jews as untermenschen, outcasts. Any Nazi laws survived long after? Non, but Napoleonic laws did.

      About the only things they had in common was their overreach to concur Russia and disregard of its harsh winters.

      • Jen says

        Napoleon I’s Grande Armée crossed into the Russian empire on 24 June 1812. It was in Moscow by mid-September 2012. The withdrawal from Moscow began in mid-October 2012. Napoleon I heard of an attempted coup in Paris in November 2012. He abandoned the Grande Armée in early December 2012 to return to Paris by sleigh. The Grande Armée left Russian territory on 14 December 2012.

        Unless Russia was in the Southern Hemisphere in 1812, everything that Napoleon and his forces did took place during summer, autumn and early winter.

    • Got to the chapter where Tolstoy ruminates on the peculiar difficulty of conquering Russia — the fact that barbarous Russians do not obey the “civilized” rules of warfare like we do. In normal warfare we expect that when our army has beaten the opposing army, massacred the civilians and reduced their towns to rubble they will acknowledge our conquest. But 3 sets of would-be conquerors from Western Europe — from Sweden, from France, and from the Anglo-French-Polish-German conspiracy of 1938 — found differently. Tolstoy writes how difficult it was for Napoleon to foresee that the net result of his troops occupying Moscow was his retreat, followed by the end of Napoleonic France. Hitler also was bewildered — none of his expert advisers expected that any country in the world — especially backward Russia — could produce so many tanks, especially while Hitler’s troops were occupying Russia. In our time (not so long ago) Rothschild found the same thing: Russia had been occupied and looted by the Anglo Zio Capitalist army of agents and ledgermen, and yet — instead of lying quiet and submissive under AZC rules, like civilized people, like us — the uncouth Russians threw some of our kleptocrats into prison, exiled others, and rebuilt their country for the third time. No wonder the AZC want us to hate Putin.

      Obomba and some other POTU$As dreamt that “modern technology is different, this time we won’t have to fight Russians man-to-man, we will simply obliterate them with a First Strike nuclear holocaust from all our missiles in Poland and other Freedom Loving Countries”. These POTU$As of course do not know History — in fact, we in the West have all been taught that we are living “in the End of History”. And so all the NATZO Leaders (the POTU$As, the Prime Ministers, the Presidents and the Chancellor) are ignorant of this peculiar Historical difficulty of conquering Russia: that it will be precisely after our “First Strike”, after we have reduced Russia to a sea of molten radioactive glass, that the Russian Army will make its fourth visit to Berlin — and its first visit to Washington.

    • mark says

      This time they’ll send in Transsexual Team Six and the 3rd Heavy Lesbians, backed up by the Bill Clinton Light Infantry, with the President’s Own San Francisco Gays to take the enemy from the rear.
      Putin and Shoigu would just fold and sue for peace immediately.

  9. Kavy says

    How to Think About Putin’s Russia” – Christopher Caldwell

    I was fascinated by this talk given about Putin by Christopher Caldwell. It’s starts off bad with Caldwell saying that Putin doesn’t have a lot of respect for the democratic processes and that a number of his opponents have been murdered, but, he adds, there is no evidence that Putin is behind them although that doesn’t mean it’s not significant.

    Caldwell then says how progressives around the world tend to dislike Putin as he’s not the sort of person who would head a pro feminist NGO, nor do we see him showing slides at the United Nations warning about global warming, and nor is he an avid campaigner for gay rights, but it is for these reasons that many conservatives, especially in the US, like him.

    After this, though, Caldwell’s analysis of Putin gets quite interesting as he is very fair to him saying that he has not done anything much wrong, really.

    Crimea? But that has always been part of Russia and the Crimeans wanted to be part of Russia.

    Pussy Riot? That was a load of nonsense as any country would have locked them up for their antisocial antics.

    And Putin’s government passed a law saying that teachers can’t promote a gay lifestyle to school children, but Caldwell, adds, this is what the Russian people wanted, and what right do we have to tell them otherwise?

    Then he says that when Russia experimented with western style democracy, the Russians got looted and were driven into poverty while western banks made off with the money, and so the Russians now don’t want anything more to do with Western democracy.

    And I don’t blame them, because this is what Western democracy and ‘free markets’ is really all about, that the West can influence their elections while Western companies buy up all their resources and infrastructure when countries are made to privatise.

    But if Putin has not done much wrong, then why does the West dislike him so much? Well, it’s because he won’t bow down to the West and he pursues Russia’s self interest. Caldwell then adds, that it is for this reason that there are many progressives around the world who really do admire Putin, even though they couldn’t care much for his conservative views, but they like the way he stands up to the Western ruling elite. In this way, Caldwell says, he is like Castro, a hero of the third world fighting the imperialists.

    A good lecture!

    • Gezzah Potts says

      Kavy: Agree 100℅. Russia, like China, Iran, Venezuela, etc stand in the way of Full Spectrum Dominance of the Planet by the bloodsuckers. Thats why they’re so demonised.

    • Gwyn says

      Yes, Kavy, a very good lecture by someone who isn’t exactly interested in kissing Putin’s posterior. It features the kind of nuanced thinking which is normally missing from discussion of Putin/Russia.

      It’s a welcome antidote to the lies of the MSM and the imbecility of those who are brainwashed into believing all those lies.

      Thanks for the link.

    • Antonym says

      When are people finally going to distinguish between Russia and Putin? Many Russians don’t like Putin; they think he acts like a mafioso at home. Liking Putin solely because he is anti Pentagon (not even anti 1%) is shortsighted.
      The Russia nation and people definitely are to be respected as any great country.

      • Mulga Mumblebrain says

        I believe that many Israelis do not like your idol, Nutty-yahoo, either.

  10. Einstein says

    Ten years ago ‘Time’ magazine featured Putin as statesman of the year for having put Russia back in order and kicked out the oligarchic robber-barons.
    Then we broke the Berlin Wall agreement and moved NATO hardware up to the gates of Moscow and Petersburg.
    Then we fomented a coup in Kiev because they didn’t want to join the EU/NATO.
    So the three historical capitals of Russia are now threatened by American invasion.
    Then Kiev threatened its Russian minority (Crimea) and they broke away, back to Russia. So, with American connivance, Kiev shot down (murdered) 238 innocent airline passengers and tried to blame it on the Russians.
    The Americans used Crimea and MH17 to “justify” sanctions against Russia and told the supine EU (against its own interests) to sanction Russia also.

    British politicians and especially press have cravenly gone along with this dangerous provocative propaganda and continued a demonization of Putin worthy of Josef Goebbels.
    Until there are any MPs in Westminister willing to question this deceitful “narrative”, we’re destined for chronic warfare exactly as described in Orwell’s 1984 – with Big Brother pulling the strings of the puppet Theresa May in a pretence of “democracy”.

    • Einstein says

      And we bleat about a Russian “military build-up”!
      What would we do if hostile ships armed to the teeth appeared before London, Edinburgh and Dublin?

      • Sean says

        Why Dublin? Dublin is not part of the UK, unlike the other two cities you mention.

    • Agree with your summation. And would add that the Kiev Coup was fomented by the CIA [aka John Brennan] and MI6 [aka Dearlove and Steele] the Skripal affair. None of these, including their media assets, are democratically accountable.

    • Gwyn says

      Thanks for those links, axis. Before today, I’d never even heard of this mark of solidarity and friendship from the Russian people to the people of the USA. I wonder why it hasn’t received more publicity…


Comments are closed.