TV prepares people for war with the United States in June or July

And when a civilian broadcast begins with the words “Let's ask the general”, it is very invigorating.

Sergey Mitrofanov

So it actually happened. Solovyov's experts are correct, proven, they usually do not bother with evidence, but mold directly conclusions. Such, in particular, is the new face of the program for me - Lieutenant General Yevgeny Buzhinsky, head of the center for political and military studies of the Faculty of World Politics at Moscow State University. He shared his impression: earlier, he also did not believe that in the end we would actually face the United States, so that we could deal with bombs, but now he sees: no, things are going towards this, no fools. We will fight the rabid imperialists. So the world optimism has lost one more adept. TV speakers attributed the war with the West to June-July of this year.

In general, people from state educational centers rule here today. I was waiting for what a bright woman from MGIMO, Doctor of Political Science, Yekaterina Ponamareva, would say. The West has betrayed Western values, she shares her innermost, and its aggressiveness towards us is eternal music ( * she quotes Butusov), nothing can stop it. Except, apparently, a good nuclear attack. The mistake of the 90s is friendship with the West, peacefulness, as evidenced by the decrypted dialogues between Yeltsin and Clinton, laid out by the Clinton Library. If Yeltsin had not asked for money for Russia (all sorts of retirement), then there would have been no war in Yugoslavia, they would have beaten their Bosnians there quietly, and Milosevic would still have remained our ally. We will not repeat this mistake again. Well, to hell with these pensions, but we will surround ourselves with sworn friends.

( * Poor young diplomats! How can they be crippled right from their youth!)

From somewhere from a conference in the "Russian Donbass" the teleguru Sergei Mikheyev returned, positioning himself as the main philosopher of TV. He is a very sincere person, for which we all love him. That being said, controversies in Donbass still cast a shadow over his brow. “Why does everyone tell us that it is somehow out of date to divide the world into zones of influence? - Mikheyev is sincerely perplexed. - We can share. And we will. Everything that is historically Russian must go to Russia".

Some specificity and deviation manifested itself, perhaps, in the coverage of the main topic of the week - the story of the undermining of the Czech warehouse. By the way, we were informed that the warehouse was bad, it was managed incorrectly and by the wrong people, and it would only be beneficial to undermine it (which is denied).

So, about the warehouse. Czech President Milos Zeman greatly helped Russian TV propaganda, making a strongly vague statement. In this statement, he admitted various versions of why their warehouse exploded, although he did not refute the Russophobic one that it could have exploded from the efforts of Russian agents. That is, there could be bad wiring and good Russian agents, equally. But in the interpretation of TV propaganda, Zeman did not seem to bend under the position of the United States and sided with Russia. In other words, the presence of some other versions in the heap of versions is considered by us to be proof of the nullity of the entire heap.

At the same time, we always overdo it with refutations. They invited M. Zakharova to add some colors. And she explained that the warehouse that exploded contained prohibited weapons. They were smuggled by a Bulgarian (not even a Czech) trying to supply the Ukrainian Bandera in the war with the Donbass militias. So such a warehouse could not be left untouchable, God himself ordered (or the headquarters of the GRU) to liquidate it, sending heroic Boshirov and Petrov there! The denial of their feat by TV looks somewhat pathetic. On the contrary, we should probably ask the Russian generals questions, why did you screw up such a harmful warehouse that in the end it exploded itself, and you have nothing to do with it? So we are going to expect that the enemies of Russia will suffer from their own mismanagement?

The same hype is observed in the subject of the attempt on the life of the President of Belarus Lukashenko. How could this topic be presented earlier, when we had more freedom of speech? Well, they would have written that the special services voiced a version of the assassination attempt, but they did not provide any evidence, and, most likely, it’s just their games and fantasies and a-ha-ha-ha . Today, the topic is presented indisputably: "irrefutable evidence of the involvement of Western intelligence services has been presented." Although where they are presented, to whom they are presented is not clear.

There is such a political scientist - Professor Dmitry Yevstaviev from HSE (we all think that HSE is Kirill Martynov, and there is also Evstaviev), so he developed the idea that the attempted murder of Lukashenka is very different for the worse from the attempts of the CIA on Castro and Hussein. Why Castro is okay to secretly kill, and Lukashenka is abnormal, I honestly did not understand. But the world community judged and condemned Hussein in public opinion, - Yevstaviev believes, - and to kill our Lukashenka without trial and investigation in the Union State is state terrorism, and our response will be crushing.

Lukashenka, however, has never been killed. On the contrary, he is perfectly healthy talking about the failure of the Western special services. They supposedly supplied the Belarusian insurgents (including the literary critic and political scientist Feduta - * I wonder, did you see his face?) With a grenade launcher. And then it suddenly became clear that getting from a grenade launcher into a car with Lukashenka was in no way possible, because his motorcade was moving at a tremendous speed. “Christmas trees, sticks,” the CIA apparently said, “why didn't we think the motorcade was so fast? We'll probably miss it". So nothing came of the CIA.

Especially pleased me with his speech this time Kurginyan - arguments about spirituality and lack of spirituality.

In Russia, there is no boredom, unlike the spiritless Western world, - said Kurginyan. He, Kurginyan, observes this when the performances end in his theater. Our spectators have their eyes shining, they live with the questions of being. This, they say, you will never see in the West. "I can always go to Avignon," Kurginyan contemptuously sums up, "but I don't want to, because the main driving force in Russia".

Of course, I was upset that Kurginyan, who despises the West and France, “can always go to Avignon”, when few normal Russians can go there. In my opinion, he has absolutely nothing to do in Avignon, and Avignon has no need to look at Kurginyan. But on the other hand, he is right that there is not enough spirituality in France. I, too, when I walk around Paris, I often ask myself, where is spirituality here? There is no spirituality here. I have never heard anyone from the French ever talk about a special French spirituality. Instead of spirituality, courtesy, or maybe public libraries. Spirituality in itself without "hello" and "goodbye" is a purely Russian phenomenon. When the next folk theater was staging "Three Sisters of Chekhov" (in France there are still amateur theaters, clubs, circles), the French director, I remember, did just that: "But how can we show that these are Russian three sisters? Ah, let's pump spirituality here".

But I was more interested in Kurginyan's passage about the burning eyes of Russians living with world questions of being. No matter how I try to imagine why their eyes are burning today and what kind of questions they are currently solving - kill me, I cannot.