午夜理论片福利在线观看,国产91素人搭讪系列天堂,97超级碰碰国产片

It shows how US government and government-sponsored NGOs organize "color revolutions" in several countries. Large part of the film (which does not deal with Russia proper) has been shown on Russian state TV. The film shows quite rare and unexpected footage which shows things I would not expect from a non-staged film.

它展示了美國(guó)政府，和其他被美國(guó)政府支持的非政府組織，如何在幾個(gè)國(guó)家組織“顏色革命”的內(nèi)容。這部電影的大部分內(nèi)容(不涉及俄羅斯本土)已經(jīng)在俄羅斯國(guó)家電視臺(tái)播出。這部電影展示了非常罕見(jiàn)，和大量讓人意想不到的鏡頭，這些鏡頭讓我明白了一些以前從來(lái)不會(huì)想到的東西。

The film shows US and pro-US politicians and activists to openly explain their technique at overthrowing the governments and subverting the army. One US expat in Kyrgyzstan openly admits that it was his work to overthrow the government. The organizers of the color revolutions in different countries are shown to attend the same seminars organized by US special services. One episode shows a blackboard with a list of countries where revolutions are planned, with dates.

這部電影展示了美國(guó)和親美的政治家、活動(dòng)家們公開(kāi)介紹他們?nèi)绾瓮品渌麌?guó)家的政府，和顛覆他國(guó)軍隊(duì)的技術(shù)。一名在吉爾吉斯斯坦的美國(guó)僑民，公開(kāi)承認(rèn)推翻當(dāng)?shù)卣撬娜粘９ぷ鳌Ｓ捌?，不同?guó)家的顏色革命組織者參加了由美國(guó)特種部隊(duì)組織的同一個(gè)研討會(huì)。其中一集展示了一塊黑板，上面列出了一些即將計(jì)劃顏色革命的國(guó)家的名單和日期。

The film shows quite surprising footage when the color-revolutionary activists from different countries discuss financial matters, divide funds and their spendings, admit loyalty to the United States. In some frxs the leader of the Georgian revolution evidently appears under drugs. I do not know how it became possible to compel somebody to discuss money or appear intoxicated under camera. Still the frxs do not seem to be made covertly.

影片展示了來(lái)自不同國(guó)家的顏色革命活動(dòng)人士討論財(cái)政問(wèn)題、分配資金和支出、承認(rèn)對(duì)美國(guó)的忠誠(chéng)等令人震驚的鏡頭。在某些畫(huà)面中，這位格魯吉亞革命領(lǐng)袖顯然是服了什么藥物。我不知道怎么回事，但似乎這種藥物能強(qiáng)迫一個(gè)人哪怕是在鏡頭下，也能極度興奮的談?wù)撨@些資金。但這些電影畫(huà)面似乎也并不是秘密制作的畫(huà)面。

The film shows some events strikingly in-time, not post-factum. For example, It shows the details and mechanics of Kyrgyz revololution in motion, days before it and just after, and preparation to the Ukraininian revolution just two months before it happened, as if the creators of the film knew exactly the time when the revolution is to come, which suggests some prolonged (for years) coordination with perpetrators.

這部電影展現(xiàn)的一些事件消息顯得非常及時(shí)，而不是事后發(fā)生的馬后炮。例如，它展示了吉爾吉斯革命發(fā)生的前幾天和后幾天的細(xì)節(jié)和機(jī)制，以及烏克蘭革命發(fā)生前兩個(gè)月的準(zhǔn)備工作，仿佛電影的創(chuàng)作者確切地知道革命的時(shí)間，這表明他們與顏色革命的幕后操作者進(jìn)行了長(zhǎng)時(shí)間(至少數(shù)年)的合作。

It also shows some politicians in quite surprising situation, for example it shows McCain to abuse the Kyrgyz foreign minister by telephone just before the revolution and shows that minister just after the conversation saying that Kyrgyz people were not ready for democracy. It also shows Georgian president Saakashvili after his speech asking the US intelligence officer whether he said all correct, and an American expat who became a Georgian education minister after the revolution, admitting how much they spent for the revolution to come. In no frx the perpetrators make any obxtions to the shooting despite being shown unpleasantly and harshly accused by the narrator (for example McCain is directly accused in intervening in internal affairs of Kyrgyzstan for the cited call).

它還展示了一些政治人物令人震驚的處境，例如，它展示了麥凱恩在革命前通過(guò)電話(huà)辱罵吉爾吉斯外交部長(zhǎng)，并顯示這位部長(zhǎng)在談話(huà)結(jié)束后說(shuō)吉爾吉斯人民還沒(méi)有為民主做好準(zhǔn)備。視頻還顯示，格魯吉亞總統(tǒng)薩卡什維利在演講后，問(wèn)美國(guó)情報(bào)官員他說(shuō)的是否正確，以及一位在革命后成為格魯吉亞教育部長(zhǎng)的美國(guó)僑民，承認(rèn)他們?yōu)楦锩牡絹?lái)花費(fèi)了多少錢(qián)。盡管電影畫(huà)面令人不快，但在任何畫(huà)面中都沒(méi)有人對(duì)拍攝過(guò)程提出任何異議，甚至還遭到敘述者的嚴(yán)厲指責(zé)(例如，麥凱恩因上述電話(huà)直接被指責(zé)干涉吉爾吉斯斯坦內(nèi)政)。

Given all the above I wonder how it became possible to make all those people not only agree for an interview but expose themselves in unpleasant situations to a group that is harshly critical of their actions, show them in the course of their real work, before, after and in the process and explain their covert intentions.

考慮到以上所有情況，我想知道到底如何才能讓電影里的這些人不僅全都同意接受采訪(fǎng)，還愿意將自己暴露在不愉快的處境中，面對(duì)一群嚴(yán)厲批評(píng)他們行為的人，把他們自己在實(shí)際工作過(guò)程中，或者在行動(dòng)過(guò)程之前、之后的工作內(nèi)容，全都主動(dòng)向他們展示，并坦白他們的秘密工作內(nèi)容。

I also wonder why I nowhere could find not only an English version but also any reference to this film in English.

我也想知道，為什么我在任何地方都找不到英文版本，甚至也找不到任何關(guān)于這部電影的英文參考資料。

Given all the above I would ask
Whether this film is staged and if yes, to what degree?
Whether it is a hoax?
Whether it is somehow fabricated?
Why it is quite unknown?

鑒于以上所述，我想問(wèn)以下幾個(gè)問(wèn)題。
這部電影是否曾經(jīng)真的上映過(guò)，如果是，上映到什么程度？
這是否是一場(chǎng)騙局？
是否是莫名其妙地捏造出來(lái)的電影內(nèi)容？
為什么它現(xiàn)在完全未知？

upxe Some of the context
15:30 Mike Stone from US state-funded organization Freedom House, 10 days before the revolution, shows a typography where they print 6 anti-government newspapers and a book on how to make revolutions "From Dictatorship to the Democracy" (which includes the technique on how to subvert the army). A plaque on the wall indicates "United States Bureau of Democracy". All the equipment shows the labeled that it is property of US government, namely, the mentioned United States Bureau of Democracy. Mike Stone says that he calls the revolutions "green" because of money they are paid with.

因?yàn)闆](méi)有具體的電影，在這里文字更新一些電影的背景知識(shí)。
15:30，來(lái)自美國(guó)國(guó)家資助的非政府組織自由之家的邁克·斯通，在革命前10天，展示了他們印刷6份反政府報(bào)紙，和一本關(guān)于如何進(jìn)行革命的書(shū)《從DC到民主》(其中包括如何顛覆軍隊(duì)的技術(shù))。墻上的一塊被掛起來(lái)的“牌匾”上寫(xiě)著“美國(guó)民主局”。所有的設(shè)備都貼有標(biāo)簽，標(biāo)明是美國(guó)政府的財(cái)產(chǎn)，也就是上面提到的美國(guó)民主局。邁克·斯通還說(shuō)，他稱(chēng)這場(chǎng)革命為“綠色革命”，因?yàn)槿藗冎恍枰缅X(qián)來(lái)為革命付出。

22:05 McCaine talks with the Kyrgyz minister by telephone, demanding they lift ban on the cited book on how to make the revolutions, and the minister promises to do so.

22:05，麥卡恩與吉爾吉斯部長(zhǎng)通電話(huà)，要求他們解除關(guān)于如何進(jìn)行革命的一些書(shū)籍的禁令，部長(zhǎng)答應(yīng)會(huì)按要求做。

25:30 After the revolution, activist of Kyrgyz revolution admits the help of the USA

25:30，革命成功后，吉爾吉斯斯坦革命活動(dòng)家主動(dòng)感謝承認(rèn)美國(guó)的幫助

25:58 Mike Stone says overthrow of regimes is his work

25:58，邁克·斯通說(shuō)推翻這里的政權(quán)是他的工作

28:40 Bob Helvi from Einstein Foundation who also publishes the book tells some advices from the book on how to subvert the army

28:40，來(lái)自愛(ài)因斯坦基金會(huì)的鮑勃·赫爾維也出版了類(lèi)似的一本書(shū)，他在書(shū)中講述了關(guān)于如何顛覆軍隊(duì)的一些建議。

53:40 Seminar on how to make revolutions, Ukraine, 2 months before the revolution, organized by McCane and Freedom House

53:40，關(guān)于如何發(fā)動(dòng)新革命的研討會(huì)，在烏克蘭，革命前2個(gè)月，由麥凱恩和自由之家組織。

32:40 - summer camp in Crimea, organized by Freedom House and seminar there.

32:40，自由之家在克里米亞組織的夏令營(yíng)和研討會(huì)。

35:28 new Miniter of education of Georgia, at the same time, Soros foundation representative. He says Soros foundation spent $300000 for the revolution.

35:28，格魯吉亞新任教育部長(zhǎng)，同時(shí)也是索羅斯基金會(huì)的代表。他說(shuō)索羅斯基金會(huì)為這場(chǎng)革命花費(fèi)了30萬(wàn)美元。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

39:00 Meeting between Georgian and Belorussian revolutionaires (Bakeria and Lybedko). Belorussian activist says the USA senate will give them several million dollars. A representative of an unnamed US organization (possibly, Soros foundation) says they will give them 4 million for taking the power.

39:00，格魯吉亞和白俄羅斯革命者的會(huì)面(Bakeria和Lybedko)。一位白俄羅斯活動(dòng)人士表示，美國(guó)參議院將給他們提供數(shù)百萬(wàn)美元進(jìn)行顏色革命。一個(gè)不愿透露姓名的美國(guó)組織(可能是索羅斯基金會(huì))的代表說(shuō)，他們將給他們提供400萬(wàn)美元，但他們需要接管革命的權(quán)力。

40:08 Bruce Jackson, US intelligence officer in retire, who heads the "Foundation for Transitional Democracies" oversees a speech of Georgian president. The president asks him whether he said all correct.

40:08，布魯斯杰克遜，退休的美國(guó)情報(bào)官員，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)“過(guò)渡民主基金會(huì)”監(jiān)督格魯吉亞總統(tǒng)的講話(huà)。總統(tǒng)說(shuō)完，詢(xún)問(wèn)他自己說(shuō)的是否都正確。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

43:00 Belorussian revolutionary leader Lybedko discusses money in McCaine's International Republican Institute. In this place there is t-shirt with a list of planned revolutions.

43:00，白俄羅斯革命領(lǐng)袖利貝德科在麥凱恩的國(guó)際共和研究所討論自己需要的資金問(wèn)題。這個(gè)地方有一件t恤，上面印著部分革命計(jì)劃的清單。

45:00 Bruce Jackson's headquarters in Washington. He meets with Georgian revolutionary leader Bakeria (who became advisor of Georgian president after revolution), and with two Russian anti-Putin activists who say they came to learn how to make revolutions. The narrator cites Bruce Jackson to say Russia is the next target for the revolution.

45:00，布魯斯·杰克遜在華盛頓的總部。他會(huì)見(jiàn)了格魯吉亞革命領(lǐng)袖貝克爾里亞(他在革命后成為格魯吉亞總統(tǒng)的顧問(wèn))，和兩名俄羅斯反普京活動(dòng)人士，他們說(shuō)，他們來(lái)這里是為了學(xué)習(xí)如何發(fā)動(dòng)革命。敘述者引用布魯斯·杰克遜的話(huà)說(shuō)，俄羅斯將是顏色革命的下一個(gè)目標(biāo)。
譯注：全文完，此人提問(wèn)到此結(jié)束，下面為少數(shù)幾個(gè)人的回復(fù)，然后這個(gè)帖子就被關(guān)閉了，此人后面又開(kāi)了一個(gè)新帖，同樣已經(jīng)關(guān)閉，沒(méi)有多少人回答，少數(shù)回復(fù)將全都貼在下面。

DVK
What is the proof that those in the movie are in fact the "revolutionaries" and not paid actors or agents provocateur from Russia's side? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. –

你有什么證據(jù)能證明電影中的人，實(shí)際上是真的“革命者”，而不是俄羅斯單方面尋找的受薪演員或密探？非同尋常的主張，需要非同尋常的證據(jù)。

Anixx
@ they are known politicians

他們都是著名的政治家。

Anixx
For example, the film shows Giga Bokeria (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giga_Bokeria) under drugs and to discuss money

例如，影片展示了Giga Bokeria吸毒后討要資金的畫(huà)面(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giga_Bokeria，此人的維基信息名人鏈接)

Ryathal
its practically a prerequisite for a super power to have people dedicated to covertly manipulating the governments of lesser states to be more friendly to them, the dishonest part would be anything suggesting that this practice was unique to the U.S.

顏色革命實(shí)際上是一個(gè)國(guó)家成為超級(jí)大國(guó)的先決條件，有專(zhuān)人暗中操縱小國(guó)家的政府，讓它們對(duì)它們更友好，最大的不誠(chéng)實(shí)部分，就是電影在暗示這種做法是美國(guó)獨(dú)有的行為。（它并不是美國(guó)獨(dú)有的行為）

Samuel Russell
Political documentaries are generally not history. They don't use the techniques of history, even of contemporary history, and they aren't based on documentary records of the past; but, rather, gaining access to contemporary records and interviews with practicing figures. Migrate to politics, strip of the "historicity" replace with "facticity."

政治紀(jì)錄片通常不是真正的歷史。他們不使用歷史歷史，甚至是現(xiàn)代史知識(shí)，他們也不引用那些紀(jì)錄過(guò)去的文獻(xiàn)記錄。而是以獲取當(dāng)代記錄，和對(duì)實(shí)踐者的采訪(fǎng)來(lái)進(jìn)行拍攝。將主題轉(zhuǎn)移到政治上，剝?nèi)ァ皻v史性”，代之以“真實(shí)性”。

T.E.D.
Interesting, I was not aware of this movie. Is this why various countries (eg: Russia, Egypt) have been going after NGO's lately? It just looked completely nutty to me, but if folks have been watching and believing this movie, it suddenly makes sense.

有意思，我都不知道這部電影。這就是為什么許多國(guó)家(如俄羅斯，埃及)最近一直在追捕非政府組織的原因嗎？在我之前看來(lái)，他們的追捕完全是瘋狂的舉動(dòng)，但如果這兩個(gè)國(guó)家的人們一直在看，并相信這部電影，他們的舉動(dòng)突然就說(shuō)得通了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Anixx
@T.E.D. in Russia it was a common sense already when the film was made. Especially after US-inspired revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine. Now, after similar attempts in Russia, Belarus, Kyrgyztan and after US-organized overthrow of Libyan government and rebellion in Syria, it became obvious to everybody, even those who does not watch the TV.

在俄羅斯，這部電影還在拍攝時(shí)，對(duì)于顏色革命的認(rèn)知已經(jīng)是一種常識(shí)了。尤其是在格魯吉亞和烏克蘭發(fā)生了由美國(guó)引發(fā)的顏色革命之后。現(xiàn)在，當(dāng)美國(guó)在俄羅斯、白俄羅斯、吉爾吉斯斯坦進(jìn)行了類(lèi)似的嘗試之后，在美國(guó)組織推翻利比亞政府和敘利亞的叛亂之后，這對(duì)每個(gè)人都是顯而易見(jiàn)的常識(shí)，甚至是那些不看電視的人。

Anixx
@T.E.D. I have added the lix to the version in French.

我已經(jīng)把鏈接換成了法語(yǔ)版了。（鏈接同樣掛了）

Lennart Regebro
This now has an answer on politics.

這一切都在政治上能找到答案。

Thorsten S.
+1: I am really a bit disappointed by the reactions here. The question is about the validity of a movie, not about if you personally like the content of the movie. Do not shoot the messenger !

+1：我對(duì)這里的反應(yīng)真的有點(diǎn)失望。問(wèn)題是關(guān)于一部電影的有效性，而不是你個(gè)人是否喜歡這部電影的內(nèi)容。不要射殺交流的信使！

Erik Schmidt
The original French film is called "Revolution.com - USA: The Conquest of the East".
The first evidence I could find of this film is a 2007 Pravda story with the headline: "USA spends over 100 million dollars on coups in former USSR". Pravda presents the French film as truth, and concludes with this assessment: "The French filmmakers do not say, where exactly on the post-Soviet space the next revolution will occur. They believe, however, that the USA is preparing coups on the entire territory of the former USSR."

法國(guó)的原版電影叫《美國(guó)革命網(wǎng)絡(luò)：東方的征服》。
我能找到的這部電影的第一個(gè)證據(jù)是2007年真理報(bào)報(bào)道，標(biāo)題是：“美國(guó)在前蘇聯(lián)的政變上花費(fèi)超過(guò)1億美元”?！墩胬韴?bào)》將這部法國(guó)電影視為真理，并以這樣的評(píng)價(jià)總結(jié)道：“法國(guó)電影人沒(méi)有說(shuō)，下一場(chǎng)革命將在后蘇聯(lián)時(shí)代的什么地方發(fā)生。然而，他們認(rèn)為，美國(guó)正在整個(gè)前蘇聯(lián)領(lǐng)土上準(zhǔn)備政變。”

The Pravda article does not lix to the film, and I could not find an English version anywhere. The filmmakers are not named, nor is their distributor. The film is not lixed to in the Pravda article. However, further searching revealed that the French agency CAPA was involved in making the original film. CAPA reacted strongly to the edited version shown on Russian television, filing a lawsuit against Rossia, a Russian TV network:

《真理報(bào)》的文章沒(méi)有關(guān)于這部電影的資源鏈接，而且我在任何地方都找不到這部電影的英文版本。電影制作人和發(fā)行人的名字也全都沒(méi)有透露出來(lái)?！墩胬韴?bào)》的文章沒(méi)有具體提到這部電影。然而，在我進(jìn)一步調(diào)查之后發(fā)現(xiàn)，法國(guó)經(jīng)紀(jì)公司CAPA參與了原版電影的制作。CAPA對(duì)俄羅斯電視臺(tái)播放的電影剪輯版做出了強(qiáng)烈反應(yīng)，對(duì)俄羅斯電視臺(tái)Rossia提起了訴訟：

CAPA CEO Herve Chabalier told Agence France Presse that “we intend to initiate a court case against the Russian state channel and its authorized representative MCG Programming Limited.” He said that “We hold that the film was cut by at least six minutes. The film, shot by the Frenchwoman Manon Loizeau (whose name was cut from the Russian version), tells not of an American conspiracy, but of the people who support the democratization of the countries of the former Soviet area.” Chabalier continued that “The Rossia channel intentionally distorted the content to fit its political goals. It was not a coincidence that the documentary film was shown on the same evening as the harsh suppression of an opposition demonstration [the March of Those Who Disagree].”
It would seem there are two versions of the film, and there is a serious difference of opinion as to the veracity of the second version.

CAPA首席執(zhí)行官Herve Chabalier告訴法新社：“我們打算對(duì)俄羅斯國(guó)家頻道及其授權(quán)代表MCG節(jié)目有限公司提起訴訟?！彼f(shuō)：“我們認(rèn)為這部電影至少被刪減了6分鐘。這部電影由法國(guó)的瑪儂·盧瓦索夫人(她的名字從俄文版中刪去)拍攝，講述的也不是美國(guó)的陰謀，而是支持前蘇聯(lián)地區(qū)國(guó)家民主化的好人們?！盋habalier繼續(xù)說(shuō)：“Rossia頻道故意歪曲內(nèi)容以符合其政治目的。這部紀(jì)錄片當(dāng)初在反對(duì)派（革命者）舉行示威游行遭到嚴(yán)厲鎮(zhèn)壓的同一天晚上放映，這并非巧合?！?br /> 看來(lái)這部電影似乎有兩個(gè)版本，對(duì)于第二個(gè)版本的真實(shí)性存在嚴(yán)重的意見(jiàn)分歧。

Anixx
Indeed, I already mentioned that the Russian TV showed the cut version with the entire part that dealt with Russia proper removed. But the full version is available in the Internet and is lixed from the first post. –

事實(shí)上，我已經(jīng)提到過(guò)，俄羅斯電視臺(tái)播放的剪輯版中，涉及俄羅斯的部分全部被刪除。但是完整版可以在網(wǎng)上找到，并且從我的第一個(gè)帖子開(kāi)始就有提供鏈接。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Anixx
The removed part also included a Gleb Pavlovsky's interview where he said that pro-Putin "Nashi" movement was created to prevent the color revolution. This interview is quite surprising similarly to the style of rest of the film: Pavlovsky being a pro-Putinist political technologist quite frankly and cynically explains that this pro-Putin party is just a political instrument against the inspired from abroad revolution. This is also strange how they managed to obtain such concessions from him (but after viewing the whole film it does not surprise much).

被刪除的部分還包括格列布·帕夫洛夫斯基的采訪(fǎng)，他在采訪(fǎng)中說(shuō)，親普京的“納什”運(yùn)動(dòng)是為了防止顏色革命而發(fā)起的。這段采訪(fǎng)與電影其他部分的風(fēng)格相似，令人非常震驚：帕夫洛夫斯基作為一個(gè)親普京的政治技術(shù)專(zhuān)家，竟然非常坦率和諷刺地解釋說(shuō)，這個(gè)親普京的政黨只是一個(gè)反對(duì)來(lái)自國(guó)外顏色革命的政治工具。這也很奇怪，他們是如何設(shè)法從他那里獲得這種讓步般的評(píng)論的？(但在大家看完整部電影后，也許就并不會(huì)太驚訝了)。

一個(gè)俄羅斯人針對(duì)一部顏色革命電影的提問(wèn)