[liberationtech] Internet filtering in the Ukraine?

[Rayzer Raygun]

On 3/12/2014 10:05 AM, Adam Fisk wrote:
> Greetings LibTech!
>
> Does anyone here know the details of Internet filtering in the
> Ukraine? I've heard of keyword filtering, but are sites actually
> blocked? If so, do you know which ones?
>
> Many thanks.
>
> -Adam
>
Dimitry Orlov, host and socioeconomic commentator at ClubOrlov is stating:

The guest post from Renée last week (Chronology of the Ukrainian Coup )
appeared on this blog because Huffington Post refused to run it. And now
I hear that no comment linking the new Ukrainian government to the
neo-Nazis or the neo-Nazis to the mass murder in Kiev can get through on
any news site. It seems like there is an actual news blackout on this
message:

> "It appears that the US State Dept. gave $5 billion to Ukrainian
neo-Nazis who used some of the money to hire mass murderers who
massacred protesters, policemen and bystanders in order to provide a
rationale for overthrowing the democratically elected government of
Ukraine and installing an anti-Russian puppet government."
>
> That’s about as short and sweet as I can make it. Please go and see
how many places you can cut and paste that sentence. It would give us an
idea of the extent of the censorship in the US.
>
> First they take over Ukraine, then Huffington Post, what’s next? Your
living-room?”

(Editorial Note: No, not your living room folks…:)
It seems American's access to correct information about Ukraine is being
'filtered'

Click through my post@ Tumblr
<http://auntieimperial.tumblr.com/post/79363236308>, it's humorously
illustrated, and honestly when I see the US government and Americans
cheering "Democracy in Ukraine" even as the descendants of the people
who chased my Bessarabian Jewish grandfather across the Baltic during
the late 1800s pogroms take power in a Fascist Putsch (See Pepe Escobar:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/CEN-01-120314.html), I NEED
some humor, and to note this list seems to have an unseemly tendency to
serve US foreign policy interests (as viewed from Stanford perhaps), NOT
"Liberation" interests.