Media Psychological Operations, Propaganda, MOCKINGBIRD, WAR

Under the Radar-3: RFID chips being used to track students and US and al-Qaeda working hand in hand

Broadcasting Board of Governors: US “Ministry of Truth” Next Step in Mind War

17 July, 2013 16:16  

In what looks like a desperate move by the US Government to manipulate and misinform the US populace due to the waning popularity of Congress, the Intelligence Community, the “War” Department and the President, on July 2nd the US Government quietly lifted a prohibition on allowing US Government manufactured propaganda to be directed at Americans inside the United States.

With the new “modifications” to the Smith-Mundt Act, propaganda produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), the propaganda arm of the US Government that broadcasts the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, will now be allowed to be fed to and directed at the American populace. Or in their words “they will provide access” to their “material” so Americans can see what is being broadcast abroad.

If you are reading this then you are one of a growing number of the world’s English reading population that has sought news and information from non-US corporate or government controlled entities. Whether you are interested in hearing unbiased reporting, seeking the truth, attempting to get the whole story or trying to get an opposing view, you have come to the right place.

Thanks to the internet it is possible for people, both in the US as well as the world, to access non-US based independent and alternative media in order to get a real perspective about events that do not go through American filters and may be biased or censored.

An example of such bias might be calling Muammar Gaddafi a dictator rather than a leader, foreign imported terrorists and cannibals in Syria “rebels”, or calling a whistle blower a traitor rather than a whistleblower.

Examples of censorship and blackouts are even more numerous and insidious, some examples include the complete media blackout that exists in the UK with regard to Julian Assange, the limited reporting in the US on Edward Snowden or the complete and almost total blackout and manipulation that exists in Serbia and in any news coming out of that country.

A couple years back Hillary Clinton indignantly complained that the US was losing the global media war. Apparently the US Government thought that the internet would be a US controlled propaganda dissemination and spying tool but unfortunately for Washington this has not been the case and the internet has allowed Americans to access alternative media and alternative views.

This latest step in the US media mind control battle is chilling for many reasons. The extreme and violent reaction by the US Government to the recent revelations of it own illegality by WikiLeaks, Bradley Manning, and now Edward Snowden, to name a few, has shown just how truly terrified and obsessed the US Government is, that its own illegality is being revealed.

The Obama Administration and the US Government’s war on journalists, whistleblowers, and truth seekers and their continuing attempts to control, muzzle and censor the internet and the US mass media have not been enough apparently. Now the US wants to transmit propaganda to the US populace, in effect filling the information vacuum they are creating, with their own “manufactured” content and nullifying the mission and the purpose of the Fourth Estate.

This latest move makes it appear even more as if the US Government is using George Orwell’s Oceania as a blueprint for the new “Amerika” and the “Homogenous American World” planned out by the Project for a New American Century. A plan which needed an event such as 9-11 to serve as a catalyst.

9-11 allowed for the total global military expansion of the US and its surrogate NATO, in order to force the world into submission if it decides it does not want to be part of a Homogenous American World.

We have seen the endless state of war that the citizens of Oceania had to live with brought to reality with the endless global “War on Terror”, with endless threats and fabricated battles against “evil” leaders such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, CIA asset Osama Bin Laden and countries destabilized and invaded by the US as examples of how terrible the world is and how “honorable and “just” Big Brother is in “protecting American lives” and spreading democracy.

We have also seen the complete and total surveillance state that the Oceanians had to live under realized though the internet and the NSA’s PRISM and related programs, with the help of “Internet Giants” the American populace has become one glued to their monitors and their narcissistic social media pages ready to accept that everything they do on-line in recorded and watched by “Big Brother” in order to guarantee their own safety. Microsoft even has a patent, taken out in 2011, for something almost exactly like the Oceanian telescreen surveillance system.

Even Oceania’s Ministry of Love and the constant fear of torture or secret indefinite arrest have been realized with the knowledge that the United States tortures and renditions and maintains a “Ministry of Love” type installation in Guantanamo or at Super Max. Moreover the US Government can now drone and indefinitely detain Americans without charge or trial or contact with the outside world.

The only thing that was lacking, as if the corporate controlled American mass media, which almost never goes against the government line, was not enough, was an Orwellian Ministry of Truth. Orwell wrote, ““He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.” With the allowing of US Government manufactured propaganda to be directed at Americans, the US now has their own internal Ministry of Truth.

The wording of the legislation and the ease by which it will be manipulated will soon make Americans the subject of Ministry of Truth type propaganda. Not only will your news be filtered Americans, as it is now, but now it will also be cleverly manufactured.

The only hope for Americans at this point is that the US State Department which controls the BBG is as inept as “winning the hearts and minds” of Americans as they are at winning the hearts and minds of the rest of the world.

There was probably a good reason why it was illegal for the US State Department to broadcast “internally-authored news stories” that are broadcast around the world by US Government controlled and financed broadcasters. But in the name of “security” and “terror” Americans have been connived into letting another right fall to the wayside and the passing of the new law. In an extreme scenario, this could be viewed as the death of the Fourth Estate.

The bill to change the Smith-Mundt Act was introduced by US Representative Mac Thornberry, a Republican from Texas and Washington Democrat Adam Smith.

They pushed the entire security and terror reasoning to the extreme with Smith saying in 2012: “Effective strategic communication and public diplomacy should be front-and-center as we work to roll back al-Qaeda’s and other violent extremists’ influence among disaffected populations. An essential part of our efforts must be a coordinated, comprehensive, adequately resourced plan to counter their radical messages and undermine their recruitment abilities. To do this, Smith-Mundt must be updated to bolster our strategic communications and public diplomacy capacity on all fronts and mediums, especially online.”

We know that the US already censors, blocks and shuts down Al-Qaeda and extremist sites worldwide and the internal United States internet is almost under a complete and total lock down. So what is the real reason for allowing government manufactured propaganda to be directed at the American masses? Big Brother needs a voice to maintain his power and legitimacy, this change to the Smith-Mundt Act gives it that.

The Ministry of Truth, coming soon, in subtle ways, to the American populace.

New York Times promotion of tired old cold war clichés

21 February, 2013   19:23  

New York Times promotion of tired old cold war clichés

In an “Op-Docs” video the New York Times published, a “KGB Agent” endorses and congratulates the stripping away of Americans’ rights and freedoms, the authorization to kill Americans and the out of control spread of drones in the United States. The use of Russia and the KGB to somehow imply any connection between the hyper-security state paradigm that exists in America is an affront to Russia.

The New York Times recently published a very odd and provocative video on its web-site which seriously brings into question, once again, the editorial policies of the publication, its journalistic ethics, its independence and the hidden motivations behind its editorial decisions.

Who the New York Times truly serves has been a matter for debate for a very long time with an almost endless list of scandals ranging from outing CIA agents to charges of fabrication and plagiarism to libeling the Premier of China Wen Jiabao

Do they serve the right-wing, the US Government, commercial interests or as some Americans call it, the “liberal” mass media establishment? Perhaps all of the above, but more likely than not, at the end of the day the true masters of the New York Times are extremely powerful right-wing hawks with deep pockets and with an agenda, which does not include the betterment of the American people, world peace or respect for the international community but which does include the advancement of their own goals: those being global domination, continued militarization and aggression and the economic takeover of the entire globe. You can call them neo-conservatives or members of America’s “black” government or what have you, that is not of primary import.

What is important is that these individuals and those who serve them, in regard to Russia, are continuously maintaining the old tired cliché’s of the “evil Soviet Union” and “Reds under the bed” and perpetually demonizing the Russian Federation, President Vladimir Putin, the Russian people in general, and any parties who promote Russian interests or strive to rid the world of these old stereo types, which were fabricated to begin with, but that is another story.

Sometimes the New York Times’ bias towards Russia and anything Russian is not so easy to spot and sometimes you might miss it unless you are looking for it and know the key words, just like American racism, but it has been the subject of my work in the past and a continuous affront to myself, my colleagues and many other Russians in all spheres including those in diplomatic and commercial circles, and those who are trying to build relations and end the tired old stereotypical “profiling” and bias that the West continues to hold and promote.

This time the biased promotion of outdated cold war thinking by the New York Times is so blatant and patently fabricated that it demands an answer. Under the “Op-Docs” video the author, Drew Christie, writes: “When I began thinking of this animated Op-Docs video, I had two things in mind. The first was the adoption of drones by the Seattle Police Department. (The program has since been scuttled.) The second was Yevgeny Zamyatin’s 1924 novel ‘We,’ which was a forerunner to dystopian novels including George Orwell’s ‘1984,’ Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’ and Kurt Vonnegut’s ‘Player Piano.’” Fair enough I suppose.

The problem that we have with it, and by we I mean my humble self most of the Russian people, my colleagues and fair thinking reasonably intelligent people everywhere, is the fact that Mr. Christie chose to portray a KGB General as one applauding the U.S. obsession with drones and the hyper-security state.

First off I would like to underline this fact for the entire planet to read, in particular those who do not know this at the New York Times, and please, if you need to repeat it three times to make sure it sets in your memory do so: “THE KGB NO LONGER EXISTS.”

The portrayal by Mr. Christie and the New York Times of a KGB General, that is if we are to assume his uniform is pre 1974 since his epaulettes had four stars, is disingenuous and offense on many levels and in many ways. The most obvious I mentioned above. The next is that it attempts to portray Russia, Russian Intelligence and the Russian people by proxy as somehow being behind or supporting the stripping away of the rights and freedoms of Americans by their own government.

In all fairness if the New York Times had wanted to make a statement on the stripping away of the civil rights, liberties and freedoms of the American people, they could and should have portrayed the Director of the CIA, a “Black Operations” General, Obama, Petraeus, Bush, Cheney, Bin-Laden or any of the other architects of the entire hyper-security state paradigm that has existed in the US and brought suffering to the entire planet since 9-11.

If you are a regular reader or listener of the Voice of Russia, then you know that we, my colleagues and I, do not personally, nor as an Official State Broadcaster, support the paradigm that has come into existence in the United States since the tragic events of 9-11 and the Neo-Conservative takeover over a decade ago. If I dare to speak for all of “us”, my colleagues, myself, Russian Officials, Russian Diplomats, Russia’s business professionals, Academics, and so on down the line, and even Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, for decades “we” have done nothing but attempt to improve relations between our two countries, improve economic and diplomatic cooperation, end cold war stereo types and the unnecessary heightened militarization between our countries and fight for the rule of law and liberty and justice.

The Voice of Russia and I personally have been and continue to document and report on the illegality of drones (the subject of the video) and the close to 5,000 human beings they have eradicated, the stripping away of Americans’ rights and the continuation of cold war stereo types by the West and in no way do we support or endorse the American Government’s unregulated use of drones, or their illegal use to assassinate or further commit activities that further unjustly cause harm to the American people or take away their liberties, wherever they may be.

Fortunately, the Russian people are intelligent and mature enough to take this and every other previous affront, with a grain of salt and not to go out and burn embassies and such and we will continue to work to better understand each other so that we may all live in peace.

Under the Radar-3: RFID chips being used to track students and US and al-Qaeda working hand in hand

21 January, 2013 11:55 

The surveillance of Americans by their government continues unabated, the US was in Mali long before the French arrived supposedly working with al-Qaeda, and Germany is withdrawing its gold reserves worldwide. All of these events are currently taking place “Under the Radar”.

Under the Radar-1

Under the Radar-2

Every week hundreds of important events occur that are important to all of us but which do not get enough media attention, either because they are over-shadowed by other major news or because they do not fit the pre-planned message that many of the world’s media are trying to promote, there is a journalistic responsibility to tell the whole story which we always attempt to do. Although we keep our eyes on the world this week’s most pressing issues that have been suppressed come from the US.

1. FBI and secret surveillance techniques

Have you hear of an IMSI catcher or Stingray? Neither did I until I read this story. The device is being used by the FBI and is basically a fake cell phone tower that is used to determine the location of all cells phones in a certain area and intercept all phone calls and texts. It is just one of the US FBI’s new tools to spy on you and one they do not want you to know about.

“Currently, EFF is suing the government for its secret interpretation of the Patriot Act Section 215, and for secret FISA court opinions that could shed light on the NSA warrantless wiretapping program. In addition, the ACLU has sued the Obama administration for its legal opinion stating it can kill US citizens overseas, away from the battlefield.”

Electronic Frontier Foundation

SLATE.COM

2. Maybe it is not surprising anymore that the US and al-Qaeda are working hand in hand to spread war and terror and keep the endless global “war on Terror” alive, but it may be a little known fact that they were operating in Mali when the Tuareg took over the country.

“… there was already a US presence in Mali in the summer of 2012. What they were doing there remains a mystery, as it is a mystery if the ever co-present flip flops on the ground were there inciting the perpetual scapegoat Al Qaeda to do this, or that. Or maybe it was not the CIA. Maybe it was the Army's "little-known and secretive" branch known as the Intelligence and Security Command.”

ZERO HEDGE

3. Germany has recently pulled all of its gold from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and is in the process of testing all of its gold worldwide. Why? This articles claims that “they” now have a TEMPEST style device that can locate and analyze gold emanations.

“News that Germany will remove 300 tons of gold from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York gold vault repeats the oft-made claim the vault is 80 feet below ground."

CRYPTOME

4. MOSSAD agents rarely get caught but when they do it should not be ignored, especially when they are hand-picked and trained from prisoners held at Guantanamo.

“For the first time in history, an Israeli agent of Pakistani origin has been arrested from Lahore, who is reportedly from the Seraiki belt region. Sources have revealed that the culprit was held at Guantanamo Bay for two and a half years, during the course of which he was subjected to brainwashing. After that, he was sent to Afghanistan where he was specially trained to plan terrorism. And finally, he was sent back to Pakistan.”

TERMINAL X

5. Well Americans, you were warned and you allowed it to happen. Now if you protest what your government does or do anything that appears to be aimed at “coercing” the populace in any way, you may be labeled a terrorist and secretly arrested and disappeared.

“A written exam administered by the Pentagon labels “protests” as a form of “low-level terrorism” — enraging civil liberties advocates and activist groups who say it shows blatant disregard of the First Amendment.”

DAILY SHEEPLE

6. The fact that American students are now being required to wear RFID tracking devices like cattle is something I wrote about before but the fact that the state is able to win the right to do such a thing in court is something that should be making the headlines worldwide.

“Hernandez, who has been threatened with expulsion for refusing to wear a chipless RFID tracking badge, had her request for a preliminary injunction denied by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Western District of Texas.”

CNS NEWS

7. Riding your bike and arguing with a police officer are crimes in California. This has been going on for decades but the idiocy of it has as far as I know never been filmed until now.

“As a result of the man ‘arguing’ with him, the criminal in uniform insists on adding a made up charge for ‘speeding’ to add on top of the made up charge of biking on the wrong side of a bike path.”

INFORMATION LIBERATION

8. Right wing propaganda tool called out for calling Americans “stupid”

US media watchdog, Media Matters for America calls out fearmongering gasbag Bill O’Reilly as he insults ALL Americans and calls them “stupid”.

“So, I have to play Paul Revere here. I have to continue to tell you the truth. But I also believe many Americans simply will not listen. And even worse, they are not smart enough -- not smart enough to even care. Disaster could be coming.”

MEDIA MATTERS

9. The death of Aaron Swartz is something the mass media may not want you to know about, especially as many are claiming his death was a murder disguised as a suicide. If you are interested in some of the writings of Mr. Swartz please visit Cryptome which is keeping a large archive of Mr. Swartz’s writings and work.

CRYPTOME Swartz

10. Al-Qaeda, created, funded and backed by the US is expanding their role in Syria and the Syrians they claim to be fighting for are not happy. Surprise, surprise!

"They see stealing things that used to belong to the government, like copper factories, or any factory, as no problem," said the rebel commander. "They are selling it to the Turks and using the money for themselves. This is wrong. This is money for the people."

Media-bias, Syria and Russia - an Arab spin

7 January, 2013 21:31  

Syria and Russia will go to war, the US is not doing enough to funnel weapons into the area of the Syrian conflict, the US is giving the Russian Federation assignments, Brahimi and Russia intentionally railroaded their own peace plan and finally “Washington has always looked for a political solution… ” These are just some of the false statements that appear in the world’s press with regard to the Syrian conflict, but having them all in one place makes one really wonder who is pulling the strings.

What is intentionally being left out by the West in any debate concerning Syria is the fact that Syria is a sovereign nation and no matter how much one country might not like the leader of any nation and how badly the leader’s removal may be desired, it is, for lack of better phraseology “illegal” to bring about the forceful removal of a leader from the outside and it is also illegal to extra-judicially execute a head of state.

The continued vilification of Russia due to the position it has maintained from day one with regards to Syria is so patently transparent and self-serving that one wonders how dumbed down the writers believe the readership must be to be buying into it.

A recent article regarding Syria by Abdul Wahab Badrakhan in Al-Arabiya News  reflects the blatant bias against Russia and Syria and the adage “if you repeat a lie long enough it becomes true”, but what makes the work in question stand out other than the Fox News style of repeating mindless talking points, is the fact that it chides the US for not doing enough and attempts to portray some sort of conspiracy between Russia and the US.

The Western reaction to a recent speech by Bashsar Assad was also indicative of the policy that the West is maintaining, namely if something does not fit into their pre-planned scenario, it has to be vilified.

The Clinton State Department either did not actually listen to Assad’s speech or chose to ignore all of the points made by Assad. The statement released after Assad’s speech is what we have heard all along: "… another attempt by the regime to cling to power and does nothing to advance the Syrian people's goal of a political transition… His initiative is detached from reality, undermines the efforts of Joint Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi …” and of course the ever repeated calls for Assad to step down.

Back to the previous article in question by Mr. Badrakhan who would appear to be a serious expert on Lebanon and the Arab World, writes some things that seem at odds with reality and like empty talking points when it comes to Syria. He states that Russia which has promoted a political solution to the crisis from the beginning and Lakhdar Brahimi deliberately caused such a solution to fail. He also says that Russia and the US have some sort of secret agreement, which might be indicative of the real Arab attitude to the US, which has long believed the Arab World is supportive of their geopolitical plans for the entire Arab World.

Here are some more talking points from the article:

“The Americans are clear about their willingness to dismantle any situation that might drag them later into direct intervention.” This statement is so patently false as to be laughable for anyone who has even briefly followed US war policies over the last several decades. The US quite frankly, does the opposite as it has been doing in Syria, perpetually looking for a pretext to invade.

“The regime got the message that it’s free to use the chemical weapons within specified geographical limitations…” There is no evidence that Assad or anyone in the government has ordered or allowed the use of any form of chemical weapons whatsoever.

“It seems now that the promises of the U.S. to the Syrian opposition, that it can count on U.S. financial and armed support… were merely words.” Amid constant reports of mercenaries and western backed foreign fighters in Syria this statement seems ridiculous. The writer also takes no issue with the fact that funding an armed opposition to over-throw a government by force is not in keeping with internationally accepted norms.

“Washington had always looked for a political solution, with an ideal scenario consisting of keeping the “acceptable” part of the regime and the immediate departure of Bashar Al-Assad, as it just cannot deal with him”, another completely false statement and the unbelievable arrogance in saying “Assad must go because the US “just cannot deal with him” is stunning.

“… the U.S. commissioned the Russians with the assignment, so they can deal with their favorable regime.” Apparently the writer believes that the Russian Federation which is one of the few countries in the world with a robust and independent foreign policy is another lap-dog for the US.

The writer then continues to demonize Russia for attempting to mediate a peaceful resolution to the crisis by saying things like: “Moscow sends an invitation to the opposition coalition to visit the Russian city for dialogue. What dialogue? With who? How will it be discussed? According to which agenda and upon which conditions?” Maybe he should answer these questions before demonizing Russia for attempting to hold talks.

And he says:”…. not offering them more than a chair at the negotiation table…” We are talking about armed insurgents and terrorist groups attempting to overthrow a legitimate government by force, they should be grateful that they are allowed a seat.

“In the imminent days, the regime will battle with Russia, which supports its reliance on Iran’s and Hezbollah’s experience…” I have no idea where he got such information but Russia and the “regime” have had and continue to have a normal relationship.

“And while the opposition was waiting to be supplied with advanced weapons…” The writer contradicts his own statement made above.

If this is the Arab position then what we can see is that they want more bloodshed and more weapons and money to be flowing into Syria so that the endless cycle of violence continues. If we take into account the Sunni-Alawite animosity then the reason for this is understandable, but to vilify and twist the facts in an already muddled situation, in reality, helps no one.

Russia in the Biased Media: Report on Chieftains, Trees and Religious Hatred

7 October 2012, 21:51  

In this installment of the Media-Bias series we look at more twisting of the facts, omission of the context, and sheer fabrications, in attacks on Russia involving the infamous group Pussy Riot. In another piece the elected President of Russia is once again demonized and the Russian people are portrayed as ignorant simplistic slaves. Russians are not slaves to anyone, and yes, there is democracy in Russia.

In yet another piece of “balanced reporting” by the Washington Post titled “Shoring up Putin in Russian countryside” another attack on Russia’s elected leader and the Russian Government, we once again see the same lack of context and omission of facts, the use of clichés and half-truths, and the stretching and manipulation of facts to make yet another event appear sinister and evil and a sign of some Machiavellian machinations by President Putin’s Government.

The writer, Kathy Lally, immediately draws a black foreboding cloud over her canvas of Russia by calling the elected head of the local administration in Izhevsk a “local chieftain”, she then goes on to claim as fact ridiculous “events’ that barely deserve the attention to be repeated but as they appear in such a respected publication demand retraction.

Calling the head of the local administration a chieftain, as if they are running around in fields living in tents is one thing, but stating as fact that the Head of the Republic of Udmurtia, walks around with a notebook with election percentage results for the United Russia Party and makes decisions regarding social programs and government projects based on the results, is insulting, scandalous and shows a complete lack of knowledge of the facts and reality. What is more it shows a complete disregard for journalistic ethics and a propensity for creating facts to suit the message.

The big story for the writer is a project to build a road and facilitate parking in the courtyard between several buildings which required the cutting down of some trees. One of the buildings houses government offices allowing the writer to target the project. What she does not mention that beyond the courtyard where the trees are that need to be cut down there are thousands of trees and city itself is surrounded by thousands of kilometers of forests.

The writer also claims that when she harassed a local opposition candidate who refused to talk to her and then she presented herself at his offices anyway, he told her that “he could be barred from the ballot if anyone photographed him talking with an American”. Something that would be true for an American politician as well if he were photographed secretly speaking to “Russians”. The fact that he did not want to talk to a questionable reporter writing a smear piece on Russia never enters her mind.

Lastly she claims that the city manager of Izhevsk told veterans that funding depends on the how United Russia did in their districts, another fantasy provocation and twisting of reality.

Sure United Russia may be involved in running the government, they campaigned in elections, won seats, and took part in the democratic electoral process but no matter how you want to paint it, the fact is that the government is not being run “for” the United Russia Party, as many hacks in the West want to portray, part of it may be being run “by” them, and if voters are unhappy they will be voted out.

Russians are not slaves to anyone, and there is democracy in Russia. One last point the writer made is citing the banning of USAID from Russia and painting this as some move by Putin. She ignores the facts about USAID and the subversive activities they fund all over the world, and sees the CIA Front through her US Government Issued rose-colored-glasses. It is critical to note that this was a decision by the Foreign Ministry and the Russian Government, not a personal one by the President. And really? What right does USAID have to subvert governments in the first place.

Moving on:

Another key phrase in stories we will touch upon in today’s media bias piece is one we see time and again and one the West loves to use all the time when pointing their fingers at others, that phrase is “Witch Hunt”. The phrase is once again used in yet another article in the Western press about the group “Pussy Riot” a group created by Western backers to bring about a divide in Russian society and to cause the questioning of the legitimacy of the Russian Government by the people.

It is important to note that even their name was created for a Western audience, and like their Ukrainian counterparts FEMEN their provocative slogans are for some “strange reason” always written in English. The first article in question, like almost all on the topic, again ignores all of the facts in the case and the activities of the members of the group before they were finally arrested and fails to take into account the context and the rage at their “stunt” justifiably felt by the majority.

Anna Nemtsova in a piece for the Daily Beast claims that the political youth group Nashi was hunting for the remaining members of Pussy Riot. She says that the group has a special investigative unit headed by Konstantin Goloskov which offered a reward for the names and addresses of the remaining members who are hiding from police. The writer is obviously unaware that such information has been available on the Russian net for a long time but I guess that is not important.

The fact that the group may be assisting the police is of course portrayed as something bad and evil, as if the group is being unfairly persecuted for their “innocent” deeds, which include being filmed have sex in a museum, and ignores the fact that if what she writes is true then this shows broad widespread displeasure by the populace in general with the activities of the group in question.

Nemtsova portrays the youth group Nashi as some sort of evil part of “Putin’s internal and foreign political machine” and Nashi activists as easily and cheaply bought supporters who would join demonstrations just for the chance to get a free bus ride to Moscow. She also claims the Nashi “commissars” are given parliamentary seats, ignoring the fact that under Russia’s democratic system these seats and positions are won in elections. She ends her “article” by comparing “The witch hunt to McCarthyism”. Clearly she knows nothing about McCarthyism to make such a comparison.

Another article on the same topic in the Guardian makes the statement that the case “highlights the crackdown on freedoms since Putin returned to the presidency in May” and also ignores everything the group did in the months leading up to their arrest, including a performance on Red Square for which they were merely fined. Although their sentence was dropped from 7 to 2 years for a religious hate crime, as with all the Western Press this leniency is ignored.

This great crackdown they are speaking about must mean the implementation of fines for illegal activities inciting hatred and a threat to the populace or perhaps the requiring of foreign funded political organizations to declare the source of their incomes, I would assume. As the write gives no examples and makes such a broad all-encompassing statement one can only assume.

An article in the New York Times sporting the headline “Moscow Court Postpones Pussy Riot Hearing” immediately tries to shed a bad light on the court with the headline although the reason for the postponement was the fact that one of the members of the group decided to fire her lawyer during the court hearing.

The article also ignores the basic details in the case and parrots the Western Media claim that this was simply a “Punk Prayer”. Something I have never heard of happening in the West. The article makes no issue over the fact that political statements were spliced into a video of the “punk prayer” later, something which should prove to anyone that their act was one of religious hatred and not a political statement as they are claiming.

The article also takes no issue with the fact that, as they report: “Ms. Tolokonnikova and her husband were filmed having sex in a museum alongside other couples, in a 2008 “protest” against Dmitri A. Medvedev…” something that no normal “protestor” or anyone in their right mind for that matter, would do.

Once again we see that the Western Press is using the case to deride Russia and to paint Russia in a bad light and continues to ignore all of the facts in the case and the actions of the group which had they taken place in any Western country would have had them locked up in a mental institution or worse.

Media-Bias and Gazprom: Western Media Rehashes “Tired Clichés of Kremlin Intrigue”

6 October 2012, 13:26 

This week Western media blames Moscow for engaging in a conspiracy to make shale gas unpopular. For example, the opening of one of the articles is sensational and right out of the cold war “The Kremlin is watching, European nations are rebelling, and some suspect Moscow is secretly bankrolling a campaign to derail the West's strategic plans.”

And just like the article says, despite exploiting cliché cold-war terminology from the very start, it’s not about the cold war, or geopolitical machinations or even military cooperation, it’s about natural gas drilling.

The article cites two shale gas fields in the US as evidence of what the writer calls “vast reserves of gas buried in deep shale rock” yet ignores the difficulties in extracting shale gas, the high-cost and the environmental concerns.

The writer also blames Moscow for engaging in a conspiracy to make shale gas unpopular by citing anonymous “industry watchers” who say “Russia is bankrolling environmental groups that are loudly opposing plans for fracking in Europe.” Fracking is the term used for a drilling process called hydraulic fracturing. The writer also fails to mention the real dangers of the practice and tries to paint Russian President Vladimir Putin in a bad or conspiratorial light because he spoke about how dangerous fracking was.

Calling Russian energy giant Gazprom “state controlled” gives the concern a less-than-legitimate connotation and ignores the fact that all energy and strategic industries worldwide are in one way or another “state controlled”, this is true for the US as well.

The article cites low gas prices in the US as something that the has gotten the world’s attention but plays down the fact that, again, shale gas is expensive to extract and that the current prices in the US are abnormally low and will rise in the future. A fact stated by Gazprom executive Sergei Komlev, whom the article cites.

Lastly the article attempts to paint an overall picture that the US may be able to provide cheap gas to Europe and compete for that segment of the Russian gas market, something completely unrealistic but that Americans want to hear, underlined by Mitt Romney who has repeated that he "will pursue policies that work to decrease the reliance of European nations on Russian sources of energy."

The whole article completely ignores many important undeniable facts, one being that part of Russia is physically in Europe, another is that Russia already has pipelines into Europe and is providing Europe with cheap gas, and the last that the US is an Ocean away and has not pipelines or realistically competitive means to get any quantity of gas to Europe, let alone on a regular and competitive basis.

Promises that the US can compete in the European gas market may sound good to the American electorate and in political speeches but lacking a pipeline from Texas to Europe such promises are merely dreams and empty political rhetoric.

The only way for the US to actually compete in the European gas market is for them to take control of resources in the Middle East for example, which would also allow them to compete elsewhere, a fundamental reason for the US’ current resource wars throughout the Middle East.

I am not the only one taking the Western Media to task, this time on the subject of media bias and slanted reporting against Gazprom. Gazprom’s spokesman Sergei Kuprianov also took on the issue much better than I could, being a man who is truly in the know of all of the nuances, in a letter to the Washington Post. According to Mr. Kuprianov the Washington Post ignored the realities of “Gazprom’s recent strategic decisions” and rehashed “tired clichés of Kremlin intrigue”.

 “Rehashing tired clichés of Kremlin intrigue” is something the Western Press seems unable to get out of the habit of doing. In case anyone needs reminding, and obviously many do: the Cold War has been over for a very long time people.

The ‘Biased-Media’ and Its Desecration of Church

5 September 2012, 16:07  

Continuing this week’s look at the biased media we look at the Japan Times Online, the UK’s Independent and the Guardian as well as the New York Times.

In a piece titled Pawns of the neo-Putin era the author, Andrey Borodaevskiy, wastes no time in launching his attack on Putin although the piece turns into an article parroting views on the group Pussy Riot. In the first paragraph he assumes to know President Vladimir Putin’s state of mind, as many critics and politicians in the West love to do, stating as fact that the president felt “anxiety” due to certain people’s actions, who exactly cause such anxiety he does not say but of course we are to assume the writer means the “opposition”.

The author then states that the president began taking “revenge” and calls the president’s staff or supporters, “henchmen”. Again he does not state exactly who the henchmen are or the objects of said revenge, but for this writer it is not important who, neither are the facts, the whole idea is to attack.

I don’t pretend to know the president or his mind but I imagine if the president were to take “revenge” on everyone who caused him “anxiety” he would not have time to eat or sleep, let alone run the country and would have to go after everyone who ran against him or ever questioned him. If what the author were writing was to be believed, in particular that the president of the largest country in the world spends time getting revenge on everyone, and it is clear he himself does not believe what he is writing, then he would have been a bit more careful in what he says. Otherwise the KGB, which does not exist anymore, might get him!

As if to back up his already thin argument based on air, the writer then continues by citing a law that increased the fine for illegal public events which he has obviously not read and then taking it out of context makes it seem like the security services are just itching to arrest people. The law in question regards fines for illegal public activities which cause a danger to the public and society and was written to prevent the further abuse and non-adherence to the law that was starting to spread in Russia. A law made necessary by the actions of groups such as P-Riot, but that is not important either I guess. The reason for the changing of the law was brought about by the aforementioned group and the Western funded and backed, so-called “opposition”, after their events became more and more violent and scores of innocent people were injured and adversely affected.

Of course painting the picture of people who gathered to cause public discontent and throw rocks and spit at police, as innocent victims of oppression is to the writer’s advantage. The fact that the “opposition’s” leaders and many of the organizers receive instructions and money from a certain ambassador who specializes in organizing color revolutions as well as the fact that many of the “activists” were paid to attend events and provoke the state and police is something the author fails to say anything about, also not important since it does not serve his purpose.

The writer continues as an apologist for the greatest provocateurs of recent history, the group P-Riot. Calling their costumes “luminous”, obviously he forgot to check his dictionary before publication, and their “song”, filled with obscene language disguised as a religious hymn making a mockery of the church and the Orthodox faith, an “irreverent number”, he proceeds to attempt to paint a picture of the Russian judiciary as being politically motivated and the “girls” (women with kids) as innocent victims.

Calling the desecration of the holiest part of the holiest church of the Orthodox faith “regretful” and an “artistic carnival-like performance of a kind that can be widely seen around the world” and pretending to know better than the judge in the case how to deal with such an unprecedented case, the writer continues to attempt to make this into some conspiracy against the people by the “evil” state.

As with all of these apologists and detractors, I wonder why they never bring up, for example California’s three-strikes law that has people serving life sentences for things like shoplifting, or Islamic law which would have probably had every one of these “girls” executed. Well the answer is rhetorical, as always any opportunity to deride Russia is something they rarely miss.

I have asked many Western supporters of P-Riot what would have happened if the event took place in the Vatican or in the church where Barrack Obama worships and no one has answered yet. Perhaps we could ask Mr. Borodaevskiy what he would do if the “girls” barged into his mother’s house and gave a “performance”, after all, according to him it was not a hate crime but just good fun. Would he agree? Fat chance.

Another publication, the Independent, published an article by Roland Oliphant, which also wastes no time in painting a very dark picture of Russia for the reader by stating “investigators tried to link a double murder to the group”, the problem with this is obvious. He implies the investigators had some interest in doing something so illegal and beyond any accepted norms.

Just to mention it since no else is, the words "Free Pussy Riot" were scrawled in blood on the wall, in English. Remember this is Russia, why would the killers write in English? For the Western press perhaps? As no one has made a point of this fact perhaps it is something we could use to paint an even darker picture of how far Western forces would go, but we won’t go there will we?

The writer calls the P-Riot provocation a simple “punk prayer” (Perhaps the Western media should take the time to find and translate the “lyrics” before they write about it?), the Christ the Savior Cathedral he calls simply “a Moscow cathedral” again diminishing the importance of the event and says, in an attempt to show some connection with the authorities, that the photos were published by a “tabloid website known to have close links to the authorities”. Known by whom? I politely ask.

Near the end of the article the writer quotes Nikolay Polozov a lawyer for the (now he calls them) “art collective”, as questioning when the slogan was written. Maybe he should seek an answer from the authorities? But even though this is an unsolved double murder investigation since it is Russia I suppose for the writer it is enough to quote people not even close to the case.

The Guardian did quote the authorities, in a piece by Miriam Elder , published alongside an offer to buy the book “Mafia State” (another attack on Russia), yet makes the inference that unknown Kremlin supporters who say the group “… encourages dangerous radicalism” accuse the group of involvement. No such accusation was made.

Almost every piece in the Western press regarding the group takes the same sympathetic slant with very few if any presenting the view held by a majority of the Russian population and those of the Russian Orthodox Faith. The attack and provocation, which they claimed was an attack on President Putin, and the coverage of it in the West has now taken a much darker and wholly different nature and appears to have changed into perhaps what it was from the very beginning, an attack on the faith of most of the Russian people.

In seeking articles presenting Orthodox opinions I did come across one in the Western press that mentions the position of people holding Orthodox views in the New York Times. At first I was pleasantly surprised, but the pleasantness ended in a matter of seconds as unfortunately it was another unbalanced smear job, this time by oneRobert Mackey. The completely unbalanced and totally biased article wins my “most biased anti-Russian report of the week award”. Starting with the misleading headline, “After Pussy Riot Verdict, Christian Culture Warriors Run Riot in Moscow” it immediately paints an extremely negative picture of activists who defend the Orthodox Church.

“Running Riot” is the term the writer has chosen to describe 2 young men who have chosen to confront those who are openly blaspheming their faith, the term would better describe what the group P-Riot was doing in the lead up to the previous presidential elections, jumping on roofs, on top of trolley busses, the insides of metro stations, Red Square and other improper locations, a rampage which ended in one of the holiest places for the Orthodox faith.

The writer does call the P-Riot “song”, which was staged in the cathedral a “profane anthem” but calls the activities of the “conservative” Orthodox activists “audacious attacks” on “liberal” Muscovites. He tries to transpose internal American culture warfare parameters onto Russian Society. I am sorry to have to inform him but there are not “conservative” and “liberal” sides in Russia, that division in American society does not exist in Russia and to use this case in particular to attempt to instill a social divide is as stupid as the antics of P-Riot. Almost every Russian would agree the Christ the Savior desecration was a stupid attack. Many might argue as to the sentence or other points in the case, but the act itself is not supported by an almost absolute majority of Russians of all faiths and leanings.

Can one really be said to “barge into” a sex museum? Apparently for Mr. Mackey such a place of “reverence” deserves quiet respectful behavior, unlike a cathedral in the middle of a service I suppose.

The bias and derision of the Orthodox activists, whose actions were filmed by a television channel, continues for the rest of the article with the writer quoting the “moral icon of society”, sex museum director Alexander Donskoy, who makes wild exaggerations of the quiet Orthodox young men saying: they are; “…threatening our lives and tearing clothes off simple passers-by, and tomorrow they’ll go raid churches of other confessions and stab atheists.”

The writer attempts to paint a picture of the P-Riot attack as not being an attack on the Orthodox Religion, which is beyond the pale. If it were in fact something political they should have attempted to stage their provocation in a more “political” location. Red Square for example, as they already had, and were not locked up (a fact the Western Press has conveniently forgotten). After they “performed” on Red Square they were emboldened by the leniency of the authorities and they attacked the Church.

Freedom of expression, dissent, opposition, demonstrations, the right to be heard and represented are all natural aspects of a democracy, but you don’t attack the holy religious places of the people, no matter what the faith. No one could be so stupid to do so “accidently” and barring insanity, logically anyone who does so must hold a hatred for the religion they attack.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

This week in the 'Biased-Media': Putin, Romney and Berezovsky

2 September 2012, 19:31  

This week in the biased-media we have Berezovsky obliterating what little credibility he had left in a London courtroom, President Putin continuing to be attacked by anonymous entities lacking facts, “poor” Russia should be pitied because it has a plateful of problems and Romney a “bad” guy “wink-wink”. Those are some of the offerings we have this week from the Wall Street Journal, the Guardian, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Economist and ForeignPolicy.com.

An event related to Russia this past week which received a lot of attention in the Western Press was the lawsuit in a London Court between “Oligarch on the run” Boris Berezovsky and Chelsea owner and multi-billionaire Russian businessman Roman Abramovich.

Although the case was one which the Western Media could have used once again to propagate anti-Russia sentiment and deride President Putin, media outlets were on the whole factual in reporting the case.

Berezovsky has been a poster boy for the West in the derision of Russia and in Western attempts to usurp President Vladimir Putin’s power, popularity and political support. However after the ruling and the statements by the judge in the case, Judge Elizabeth Gloster, it is highly unlikely he will now be much use to MI-5/6 and Western spin-doctors as his credibility was all but obliterated.

The Wall Street Journal, who we cited as being biased several weeks ago, was not apologetic towards Berezovsky calling the ruling “a culmination of Mr. Berezovsky's stunning fall from power.” However their reporting on the case also included the further promotion of misconceptions and half-truths about Russia.

The judge in the case, in a 38 page summary of her judgment dismissing the case, said Berezovsky was "…. an unimpressive, and inherently unreliable, witness, who regarded truth as a transitory, flexible concept, which could be molded to suit his current purposes." She also said: "I regret to say that the bottom line of my analysis of Mr. Berezovsky's credibility is that he would have said almost anything to support his case."

Further blasting his credibility the judge said; "At times, the evidence which he gave was deliberately dishonest; sometimes he was clearly making his evidence up as he went along in response to the perceived difficulty in answering the questions in a manner consistent with his case; at other times, I gained the impression that he was not necessarily being deliberately dishonest, but had deluded himself into believing his own version of events."

Berezovsky’s slanderous claim that he was pressured by President Putin into selling ORT television was also the subject of the judge’s ire, something which greatly upset Berezovsky and which might have resonance on his case for asylum as the claim was one of the cornerstones of his asylum application. The judge said flat out that she did not believe his claim.

After the ruling Berezovsky did what he did best, he blamed President Putin for his own failure, this time in the court saying he "had the impression that Putin himself wrote this judgment.” He also provided more evidence that he may be delusional, as was stated by the judge, and losing touch with reality when he accused the judge of “re-writing Russian history”, as it did not coincide with his own self-serving version of events.

In contrast, she found Abramovich, who did not appear at the hearing to be "a truthful, and on the whole reliable, witness."

Back to the Murdoch Owned Wall Street Journal, as I said above, they did present a slight slant that was not fully in keeping with reality. Their characterization of the case as coming out of “a post-Soviet soap opera” and “bordering on comedy” as well as references to the “Godfather”, “modus operandi” and the like only served to paint the events as less than legitimate, rather than blaming Berezovsky for making outrageous claims as he strives to rebuild his dwindling millions by suing everyone he can. All that said the coverage by the WSJ was on the whole surprisingly balanced.

Berezovsky did manage to further damage Russian business and the image of Russia by suing Abramovich in a British court as the case should have been heard in a Russian court. Holding the case in London was an affront to the Russian judiciary and damaging to its image. The case also damages the image of Russian business as it brought out old stereotypes and the dark side of Russian business after the collapse of the Soviet Union, an environment that no longer exists and which the Russian business community has worked hard to eradicate.

Moving on to a much more deceptive, layered and intricate anti-Putin piece published on one of the “blogs” of the Economist, we see anti-Putin propaganda reach an entirely new level. The piece deceptively begins by criticizing other “Russia-watchers” for “much talk and few facts” and immediately links to an article on the Guardian citing Stanislav Belkovsky whom the anonymous writer calls a “rumor-monger” and one who speaks “without citing sources”, in an obvious attempt to make the reader believe that what follows are credible and unbiased facts.

The piece is called “Nice Work” I would re-title it “Nice Try”. What follows is even more talk, conjecture, the twisting of the facts and the citing of questionable sources who clearly have an agenda of their own to promote.

The “anonymous” author continues to cite a “report” by Boris Nemtsov, someone whom the Russian media reported was in the pay of one of the western Ambassadors to Russia and who did everything possible to hurt President Putin’s chances of re-election during the last elections.

Anonymous also cites an unrelated Levada center report regarding general corruption in a way that attempts to show a link to President Putin and “research” by one Mikhail Dmitirev another person with an agenda to promote, which supports claims of discontent amongst the “middle-class opposition” in Russia.

Finally the piece finishes up with quotes from, (Are you ready for this?!), “A man in the city of Dzerzhinsk”, and a suggestion to visit a “mysterious palace” that the BBC investigated but was unable to prove belongs to anyone.

Nice try!

The next article to enter the radar screen appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and again is by an anonymous author. From the first sentence it paints Russia in a negative light continuing with its “problems” and attacking the Kremlin, democracy in Russia and President Putin.

The article slanders President Putin by saying things like “Mr. Putin could be described kindly as a control freak or a frustrated dictator.” It also paints Russia as some sort of 3 rd world country by saying WTO entry will “raise the living standard” and again attacks the president for the actions and deserved punishment of the group Pussy Riot.

The article which just repeated anti-Russian talking points then makes a final “apologetic” swipe at Russia by saying Romney was wrong in calling Russia geo-political enemy number one. Not for the million reasons that this is false, but because Russia has “a full plate of demanding problems”.

Bravo.

The last piece for now brought a small surprise when I found a two paragraph quote by yours truly in it. The article in question titled: "Russian press rips Romney and his promise of ‘Republican hell’" by one Uri Friedman, no anonymous author here, deals with the topic in a more or less balanced manner, however he does not counter or go against any of the statements made by Romney or support any of the points that were brought up in the Russian Press.

If there are Americans who feel differently from Romney it is not apparent from the article as there are no views presented from the other end of the political spectrum to counter Romney’s aggressive anti-Russian rhetoric.

Silent support or just a biting of the tongue? Hard to blame him for what he did not say, but still.

That’s all for now. If you have any examples of “biased-media” please send us a link and please send me your comments and I will publish them in the next edition. I can be reached at jar2@list.ru

Alleged Hostility Toward Christians is Racist Manipulation of the US Media

27 August 2012, 14:46

Christians are under assault in the United States, claims recent report issued by Family Research Council and Liberty Institute. On the surface it looks like a seemingly alarming serious survey focusing on human and religious rights abuse. But scratch the surface and hidden agenda and manipulation of facts become obvious.

The subject of this report, and its coverage by Fox and the right-wing media may not exactly fall into the category of “media” bias but it does fall into the category of bias and the clever promotion of secret agendas and hate.

At first glance it sounds alarming: US Christians under assault – report, and it would be alarming, were it true. The report in question titled “The Survey of Religious Hostility in America” (not “A” survey but the “The” survey) is deceptive and designed to damage President Obama’s re-election chances and cleverly propagate, among other things, the intolerance of religions not deemed “real” by the U.S.’ fanatical far religious right.

The “report” wastes no time in attacking Obama and does so on page (i). The following 2 pages are designed to impress and intimidate us with the no doubt impressive resumes of the authors: Kelly Shackelford and Tony Perkins, two individuals who have made careers of using their government service and positions to advance their narrow intolerant right-wing views. Mr. Perkin’s self-avowed goal is to “…affirm and defend the Judeo-Christian values…” the US is founded on. Being listed as the leader of a hate group is also among his credentials but that of course is not mentioned.

The report cites case after case of what it calls discrimination against Christians and Christianity but fails to present all of the facts in each case and fails to note that almost every case they mention are related to issues of separation of Church and State. This is very important because it goes to underline one of the goals of the organizations in question, and that is the funding and further integration of the state and the “Christian” faith.

These are the same people who vilify President Putin and Russia because he received the blessing of the Patriarch and scream about the rights of those who in an act of religious hatred and intolerance desecrated the holiest church of the Orthodox faith, instances where they could twist the facts to their own ends and screamed “No separation of Church and State!” For these people twisting the facts or leaving them out entirely is an art.

The report attacks secularism, homosexual rights, abortion, and nowhere does it mention attacks and even the murders of members of the Muslim Faith, which the organization sees as a “Fanatical Religion”.

Who authored and funded the “report” is very important as it shows that the report was biased from its very creation and was designed to support pre-planned positions and reach false conclusions which were known from its inception.

The Family Research Council, or FRC, purports to support “traditional family values”, something few could speak out against, but how they have chosen to go about it is questionable and promotes the intolerance and marginalizing of minorities and all other religions, even Orthodoxy, which they view as not being “real”.

According to Right Wing Watch and other watchdog groups, the group lobbies for state-sponsored prayer in schools, state funding for private schooling (a way for whites to avoid segregated public schools), censorship in libraries, an end to sex education programs in schools, abstinence as the only method of birth control, an end to reproductive freedom, no abortion even in the case of rape or incest and the right to discriminate against gays and lesbians.

Their goals include: “establishing a conservative Christian standard of morality in all of America's domestic and foreign policy”, defunding the National Endowment for the Arts and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the disestablishment of the Department of Education.

The Liberty Institute claims they advance “the cause of liberty, including religious liberty”. However they only support those who share their narrow views, the same as those outlined above. An extensive search found no cases where they came out in defense of Muslims, Jews, Buddhists or any other religious group or faith for that matter.

The Family Research Council has been listed as a hate group and its leader Tony Perkins as the leader of a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The organization Equality Matters, an organization that fights for LGBT rights also has an extensive data base on the FRC as does Media Matters for America.

In summary the so called “report” is another thinly guised attempt by a hate group promoting intolerance and using some of the same tactics used by white supremacist groups namely the use of provocations to receive a response they can rally against, the omission of facts and the claim of reverse discrimination.

To understand how the Christian faith has been used by hate groups in the US for centuries one must delve into the psychology of the angry white intolerant part of the population of the country and there is quite frankly not enough space in this column for that.

Perhaps some of their points are valid and even I might agree with one or two, but a healthy democracy must include a separation of Church and State, tolerance for other views and other religions and the protection of minorities.

Religion should never be used as a cover to promote hate or killing, as the FRC does, as the KKK does, as Jihadists do, and even as Hitler did. We as intelligent citizens of the world in the 21st century must speak out against intolerance and do what we can to stop the hate. After all, if you believe in a higher power, we are all “God’s” children.

This week's Biased-Media: Pussy Riot and Anonymous Russian “Officials”

http://www.jar2.com/Topics/Media_Operations.html

08 2012

Here is this week's installment regarding media bias in the Western media. Today we will look at not the outright lies or twisting of facts but the much more subtle art of semantics, connotation, context and choice of words. In this article we also published readers' emails who spotted more examples of the media-bias.

The first article that caught my eye this week was one by Time Magazine, a publication I used to enjoy reading. The article was by Simon Shuster and right from the start it is clear that it is biased and follows the vilify-Russia-any-chance-you-get editorial policy prevalent in the West. The article in question is titled: Russia’s Pussy Riot Trial: A Kangaroo Court Goes on a Witch Hunt.

Starting the headline with “Russia’s” instantly shows it is something “foreign” to the American reader and not “ours”. His choice of words depicting the judicial process as “A Kangaroo Court” is another carefully chosen insult to the entire Russian judicial system and plays loose with the term Kangaroo Court, which is an unofficial or mock court set up spontaneously to deliver a predetermined verdict.

Clearly Mr. Shuster knows very little about the Judiciary of the Russian Federation and also the term Kangaroo Court as the term does not really apply here at all. There was nothing spontaneous or preplanned in the court nor in its hearing of the case, with its months of filing, the hearing of arguments and all of the processes that take place in a court of law.

The term “Witch Hunt” also does not apply but Mr. Shuster does not really care about the facts or accuracy when choosing to deride Russia. A “witch-hunt” is a term that implies a widespread systematic campaign against wrong-doers or those who hold different views. To characterize the Pussy Riot case as a witch hunt is an incredible distortion of the facts. These women spent months, jumping on trolley-busses, climbing the interiors of metro stations, performing in places they were not supposed to including the Red Square and then defiled the most sacred area of the most sacred church of the Russian Orthodox Church. A witch hunt? They were provoking a reaction and like the fabled Russian Bear, slow to anger and slow to rise, they finally got their smirking selves arrested.

Mr. Shuster opens his “article” by asking: “Is the ongoing trial of three Russian feminist punk rockers in Moscow a sign of a new tyrannical streak defining the rule of President Vladimir Putin?” To which I will answer, NO Mr. Shuster, it is a sign of the new and transparent nature of the Russian judiciary and is a testament to the patience and wisdom of President Putin and Patriarch Kirill and Russian Society as a whole. Maybe Mr. Shuster will answer a question I have asked human rights “defenders” and others in the West who support this group. What would have happened if a group staged a similar act, attacking the president, in the Church at Camp David where Obama worships, or in the Vatican? Are we to believe if someone blasphemed the Catholic Church would a country with “In God We Trust” written on their money, have done absolutely nothing? I doubt it Mr. Shuster.

A country that brutally arrests people for silently dancing at memorials (HuffingtonPost) would probably execute someone for barging into Obama’s church during a service and while making a mockery of a hymn, proceed to scream vulgarities and epithet’s at the leader of the country.

The rest of the piece continues by citing questionable percentages, and quoting those in collusion as well as reporting the facts through an anti-Russia prism.

Mr. Shuster attacks the fact that President Putin saved the country in the 90’s, a fact for which we are all grateful, he makes it a point that Mr. Putin received the blessing of the church, something U.S. leaders also receive when visiting the Pope. He also uses so many generalizations and ambiguous phrases and quotes only those who support the group making his piece completely unbalanced.

Another case of twisting the truth and stretching the meanings of words comes from CNN’s Christiane Amanpour (Amanpour.Blogs.CNN.com) and a supposed “expert”, one Dimity Simes, who cited unknown and unnamed Russian “officials” who he claims said Russia would not resist a military intervention in Syria and this intervention would not become a major issue in the U.S.- Russian relationship. If such “officials” made such “official” statements regarding the position of Russia on Syria it would be scandalous as this runs counter to everything Official Moscow has been saying for years.

The so-called-expert also claims, like many in the West love to do, to understand President Vladimir Putin’s psychology, something CNN calls a “fascinating insight”, he stated “If you understand Putin’s psychology, the last thing you want to do is to put him publicly in the corner if you want his cooperation.” I wonder how he understands the “psychology” of President Putin as he is neither a psychologist nor has ever met the President.

Russia as Reflected by the Western Media: Weekly

31 July 2012, 18:46

The Western media is full of inaccuracies and biased reporting regarding Russia. In an attempt to counter such information, we will be publishing and countering examples of this on a weekly basis. If you see something in the press and you think it might sound fishy, please let us know and we will include your name in the material.

Even in this day and age of instant messaging, world-wide-web and hand-held wireless communication devices capable of sending and receiving information to and from anywhere in the world, there still exists a huge divide between reality and what is presented as fact in the information and the news that is being broadcast around the world. This is painfully obvious when it comes to information about Russia in the Western Press.

During the past week there have been several topics concerning Russia in the news which have not been entirely un-biased. The main one being the situation in and around Syria, of which the coverage is more often than not skewed in favor of the West’s views and plans for the region. This includes claims that Russia was providing offensive weapons to kill protestors, delivering attack helicopters and the like. All claims were later found to be untrue, yet the West keeps putting them forth.

Russia has, since day one of the internal upheavals in Syria, promoted an internal peaceful resolution to the Syrian conflict and has made many attempts to bring the opposing sides to the negotiating table.

According to Prime Minister Medvedev in the transcript of an interview he gave to the Times newspaper in London, the differences between the Russian stance and the Western one are much less than the world’s media have made out.

Russia has also been a staunch defender of respect for the sovereignty of Syria, something which the West has vilified as many see it as acceptable that certain powers in the West constantly interfere in the internal affairs of other countries.

According to Russia’s Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov, “By supporting radical Islamists, the USA aims at impose control over the entire region and points the edge of an extremist dagger at Russia…” and “While making grandiloquent statements about democracy and human rights, the West has been waging naked aggression against Syria.” Also, “The West – that declares war on international terrorists, such as the CIA’s brainchild Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brothers – in fact actively cooperates with them. It is with their help that the undeclared war on Syria is waged today.” Of course these issues have, for the most part, been ignored by the Western media, although any cooperation between the US government and Al-Qaeda should be something that would be scandalous for the American public.

Russia (or the USSR – even worse in their opinion) is also the country of choice by right-wing American commentators and pundits and many politicians when they give example of “evil” countries. For example, on June 29 Rush Limbaugh compared the reporting of job forecasts in the media to Soviet media reporting on wheat production. Why the comparison? Because it is convenient to bad mouth Russia to scare people into supporting some irrational or baseless position in an argument.

Another good example of this was on the June 29 edition of Fox and friends, another in a long chain of Murdoch-owned operations. Co-host Stephen James Doocy asked the question, while speaking about healthcare, “What is this, Russia?” First off, why is affordable healthcare such an evil thing for America’s far right? Second, the Russian Federation has universal healthcare for everyone, including Doocy if he were to become ill here, and people can buy supplemental policies if they want. Nothing evil at all there.

The coverage of the Pussy Riot trial is also another area where the divide is great. For most of the West and the Western media, these are people exercising their freedom of speech. For many in Russia, these are people who went way too far and unjustifiably desecrated the Church. For instance, Western reports are full of claims of large crowds of supporters while balanced news sources and most Russian media report of crowds opposed to these women.

 

Media Bias: U.S. Coverage of Russia

18 July 2012, 19:07

Media bias: U.S. coverage of Russia

In the western media there exists a tangible and increasingly obvious media bias towards global events and countries around the world, in particular when it comes to reporting on Russia related issues. For the U.S. media in particular, recent years have seen a decline in readership and a plethora of other problems: scandals about manipulation, plagiarism, intimidation, falling profits and obvious cases of reporting outright lies as fact.

The reasons for this are many and even though there does not exist an official censorship body which controls the media, most U.S. media outlets are the victims of self-censorship or “Market Censorship” as some call it. This occurs due to a desire not to offend or displease their advertisers, owners or the government.

Regardless of the underlying reasons it exists and must be countered. Most readers and consumers of information and news are intelligent and can often judge for themselves how much validity to give a particular source but the majority do not have the time to investigate and take a closer look at the information they are presented. Most of their time is spent in digesting the information they are given and this is exactly what those who wish to manipulate the media count on. Unfortunately this occurs so regularly that media-manipulators have become emboldened and rely on this fact.

One shining example of “less-than-honest-media”, and that is putting it lightly, would be Ruport Murdoch’s Fox News, an outlet so blatantly dishonest that it is rarely taken seriously by anyone who slightly opposes their views or seeks a balanced source of information. The practices of Fox News include everything from having their own goon squad, or “Fox Security” as they call it, which is used to harass and physically intimidate people who oppose the organization, to doctoring photographs of people they target so they appear less attractive. (Wikipedia, Political Cortex, Prison Planet, Dailykos.com, Firedoglake.blogspot.com)

When investigating Western media bias toward Russia some recent shining and blatant examples are impossible not to mention and too often Fox News is right in the middle them. (NewsHounds) The most recent outright falsifications and attempts at cover up involve the events in South Ossetia and the recent demonstrations by the so-called “opposition” here in Moscow. Other areas that are continuously the object of censorship and manipulation include Iran, Syrian, the Middle-Eastern conflicts and Balkan coverage.

One good example of manipulation by the media was coverage of the invasion and bombing of South Ossetia and the murder of civilians by the Georgian Army. The false reporting quickly became clear and obvious as witness reports began to come out. The clearest example being the scandal surrounding the then 12-year-old Amanda Kokoeva who was stopped from telling her story in an interview on Fox News after she began telling how she and her family were saved from the Georgians by Russian forces. (Russia Today)

The numerous doctored photos and even video coverage of the recent demonstrations in Moscow are also another clear example of western media manipulation. These include the usage of Moscow crowd photos from 1991 (TheAtlantic.com) and footage of Greek riots passed along as being in Moscow, (HyperVocal.com) also by Fox News. All of these attempts were engineered to show that the level of violence and the amount of the people involved were much greater than they were in reality.

The reality was that many of these events were attended by more western reporters than demonstrators and that even though they were being funded by the U.S., through NGOs and their agents, (ActivistPost.com) and people were being paid to attend the anti-government demonstrations, (SFGate.com) the actual turnout was nothing to write home about. The fact that the U.S. attempted to interfere in the election of President Putin and organized anyone it could to do everything possible to de-legitimize the election of the popular and well-loved leader is just one more example of U.S. meddling into the internal affairs of sovereign nations.

The internet has, for its part, been helpful in off-setting many attempts at media manipulation. Many incidents would never come to light if it were not for media watchdogs, bloggers and alternative media outlets. For this reason the U.S. has aggressively pursued anyone who does damage to its media manipulations or is too successful in getting out the truth. This was clear after 9-11 and the attacks on 9-11 truth sites and has been epitomized by the U.S. reaction to the efforts of Wikileaks.

The truth is something that criminals and tyrants fear. It is also something that can not be allowed when it interferes with geo-political plans for domination, resource wars, or the military takeover of the planet. We saw this on 9-11 when reputable experts, witnesses and even engineers were gagged by the hundreds, if not thousands, from telling the truth. We saw this in the invasion of Iraq, with yellowcake, WMDs and fake atrocities. We also saw this in the former Yugoslavia, with fake atrocities and the continuing media blackout in Serbia.

Unfortunately that is not all, we continue to see this in Syria and Iran, and other locations where the West has plans in place and the reality on the ground must be made to coincide with their scenarios, even if it means creating complete and total fabrications.

As the falsehoods continue so do the number of dead, this is most obvious in such places as Afghanistan, Syria, Bahrain and other “hot-spots”, even in Egypt, where the U.S. recently did a 180° about face and supported the Muslim Brotherhood.

Once again we see that for the U.S., the truth is a very inconvenient thing and if it does not please them, they will attempt to create their own.

 

 

 

Last Update: 08/21/2018 22:47 +0300

 

Site 1JAR2 Blog Button

 

JAR2 Biz

 

 Link to JAR2 Twitter Account  Link to JAR2 YouTube Account  Link to JAR2 Blogger Account  Link to JAR2 Live Journal Account  Link to JAR2 Word Press Account    Link to JAR2 Sonation and Support Page

 

  Please help keep us going and make a donation Thanks to all supporters!

PayPal, Yandex, Qiwi, Сбербанк Sberbank Visa 4276 3800 4543 8756

Copyright JAR2 2003-2017 All Rights Reserved

Publishing Banned Truth Since June 06, 2003