Are Americans stupid?

Renew America Article - 

aka 'Are Americans Stupid?'

July 19, 2014
Is the German chancellor an agent of Russia?
By Cliff Kincaid

In the wake of the shoot-down of the Malaysian Airlines plane over Ukraine, various pundits continue to say it is unlikely that Europe will do much about it. But why? It is just a lack of will? Or something else?

The evidence is being ignored by most of the media, but it continues to indicate that German Chancellor Angela Merkel is an agent, or at least a stooge, of Russia's Vladimir Putin.

In an extraordinary development, the office of the President of Russia reports that Putin said on Wednesday that the German Chancellor is "a reputable European leader under whose leadership Germany has made great progress in the social, economic and political spheres."

The message noted "the high level of cooperation that Russia and Germany have reached," and reported that Putin told Merkel "that the further development of bilateral ties regardless of the political situation serves the interests of both nations."

The comments were included in the context of greetings on Merkel's 60th birthday.

The Kyiv Post reports that the people of Ukraine, who are involved in that "political situation" alluded to by Putin, are not amused.
...
He added, "Western and NATO countries believed they could tie Russia into greater military cooperation through engagement, but now have realized that Russia was probably never really interested in that."

This confirms the point made by Air Force General Philip M. Breedlove, NATO's supreme allied commander for Europe and commander of the U.S. European Command, who recently told a Pentagon news conference, "For the last 12 to 14 years, we've been looking at Russia as a partner. We've been making decisions about force structure, basing investments, et cetera, et cetera, looking to Russia as a partner."

The truth is that Russia deceived the U.S., and Germany was in on the deception. The real partners are Russia and Germany.

...extract only...
SOURCE - Renew America - here.

----------------------------------------------------

COMMENT

Now they're resorting to smearing Angela Merkel.  LOL.
Pathetic.

Awww, the US was 'earnestly' cooperating with Russia -- er, like they were cooperating with their ally, Germany -- on whom the US was recently caught spying?    LOL.

Deceit is what the US specialise in.  LOL.

TWITTER - Tweet Responsibly & Combat Russian Propaganda Now!

TWITTER

A handbook for responsibly tweeting breaking news, 

via @onthemedia

** Verified account

**

When I die, bury me inside the Mars Cheese Castle. I write for @NationalJournal. Past: @Slate, @NPR, @Chronicle, @JournalSentinel. **@nationaljournal.com

Washington, DC 

* Some Twitter post above *   
-------------------------------------

COMMENT

It looks useful.

• #1 - So don't go to news outlets?  LOL.

• #2 - Hey, don't knock anonymous.  Not everyone will put their necks on the chopping block to get information out.  But that doesn't make the information any less valuable.  Just handle with caution.  LOL.

•   #3 - Are you kidding?  

Many legitimate and reliable sources quote other sources.  But if unsure of the source, I guess you go to  the original and check it out.

... Yeah, whatev-- for the rest.

Buyer Beware

The mainstream media impart what they wish to impart, on behalf owners, on behalf of corporations, on behalf of government & on behalf of buddy politicians -- so handle with care.

Far better to read widely -- and that includes Twitter.

Close to incident isn't always the best place to read.  

There's nothing out of the Ukraine that I would bother reading (and most definitely not about the Malaysian Airlines MH17 incident).

So you take the risk and occasionally get it wrong?  Big deal.  

Twitter's not held up to some journalistic benchmark; it's a means of communicating information informally and rapidly.   

By all means, scrutinise Twitter but don't expect to hold Twitter to same benchmarks as mainstream media ... it's not that kind of beast.

By the same token, don't dismiss Twitter offhand ... there's some fantastic material on there.  And if there's the risk of the occasional hoax, well that makes it so much more fun.  LOL.

Mainstream media deliberately get it 'wrong' most of the time. What you get in mainstream media is impression creation and 'party line' propaganda -- or whatever agenda they themselves wish to push.

Read mainstream, but read it with a critical eye -- and check out what the *other side* is saying.  

As for Twitter ... don't be shy.  Check out whatever you damned well want &, never fear, tweet away to your little heart's content (it's not journalism ... LOL).

Take what you will and enjoy it for what it is.  LOL.

The Twitter poster who put up the above guidelines writes for:  National Journal (Washington):

National Journal
The Watergate
600 New Hampshire Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20037 

NationalJournal.com

NationalJournal.com covers politics and policy in Washington, including the following issue areas: White House, Congress, politics, energy, health care, defense, and technology. 

Owner:  Atlantic Media Company

David G. Bradley ... is the owner of the Atlantic Media Company, which publishes several prominent news magazines and services including The Atlantic, National Journal, The Hotline and Government Executive.

Before his career as a publisher, Bradley founded the Advisory Board Company [Global research & technology] and Corporate Executive Board [CEB is a publicly traded company that provides advisory services to businesses worldwide], two Washington-based consulting companies.

Politics

Politically, Bradley considers himself a centrist, although he has also described himself as "a neocon guy" who was "dead certain about the rightness" of invading Iraq. [wikipedia]

Well, thanks for the guidelines nice corporate people ...

P.S.

'A handbook for responsible tweeting' sounds like something out of Communist China.  LOL.

Hey, is this the first shot of the fight against Russian and Palestinian  'propaganda'?!!

Quick, someone tweet Rasmussen and the gang!

Biden yapping will echo around the news stories

Biden says downed jet apparently "blown out of the sky"

Reuters-6 minutes ago

"This is truly a grave situation," Biden said in a speech in Detroit. He said he had ... He spoke by phone to Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko. Speaking of ..

 ------------------------------------
COMMENT

More of Biden's hysteria & propaganda.

Expect this to keep being echoed in news stories.

GAZA & BEYOND - media propaganda wars

Israel-Gaza conflict: Social media becomes the latest battleground in Middle East aggression – but beware of propaganda and misinformation 

 Monday 14 July 2014

The Twitter hashtag #gazaunderattack, which emerged as Israel launched Operation Protective Edge against the Palestinian territory earlier this month, was founded on the presumption that news media are failing to report the story.

Graphic violent images of civilians under fire were posted in large numbers, suggesting that news organisations were turning a blind eye to the attacks. “The media are not reporting anything,” was the hashtag’s catch line.

But social media, especially in its treatment the Middle East, has become a minefield of propaganda and misinformation.

Analysis by Abdirahim Saeed of BBC Arabic found that some of the pictures of violence circulated on the #gazaunderattack thread were recycled images from as long ago as 2007. Some were not even from Gaza at all but showed events from the ongoing conflict in Syria. Many of the pictures have since been widely distributed as the subjects of thousands of retweets.
...
Social media has become one of the weapons of war. The Israeli Defence Force, which has been on Twitter since 2009, now has 286,000 followers. During violence in 2012, the Hamas military wing set up its own @AlqassamBrigade account to trade threats with the IDF. Twitter shut the account down earlier this year but the nature of social media means that the propaganda war is open to everybody and sources of information are increasingly difficult to determine.

In the student union of a private university in the Israeli coastal city of Herzliya, a “Hasbara war room” has been set up as a contribution to the military effort. Hasbara literally means “explanation” but has also come to signify propaganda. Up to 400 students sit at banks of computers getting Israel’s message out online. “The goal is to deliver a very clear message to people abroad – Israel has the right to defend itself,” Lidor Bar David told Israeli news website, Ynet.

“Although they haven’t been called up to the army yet, they’ve decided to enlist in a civilian mission that is no less important,” reported Ynet.

The students – speaking in 30 languages – target online forums while aiming to appear as ordinary social media users. They lobby Facebook to take down pages which incite violence against Israel and circulate drawings of Hamas rockets made by traumatised Israeli children living close to Gaza.

 .....

 EXTRACT ONLY - SOURCE - The Independent - here.

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT

So Rasmussen/NATO pointed the finger at Russia's supposed 'propaganda' on social media, the other day.

NATO officials are concerned about what they see as a sort of ambiguous or shadow warfare by Russia, including propaganda campaigns and the use of separatist proxies within several countries.
Groups within Russia have been posting photos on social media that purport to shows major humanitarian problems in eastern Ukraine, the NATO military officer said, but in fact the photos come from other places and times.

"Their statements to their own citizens appear to be building a justification for interference, and that is a bit worrying to us," the officer said. - SOURCE - WALL STREET JOURNAL - here.

The way I see it, it's the west that's stealthily building justifications for interference in eastern Europe -- and this is just another example.

And now it's the turn of Palestinian supporters on social media.  LOL.

But the BBC itself puts out anti-Russian propaganda pieces sponsored by a dubious 'survey' group, that's actually an offshoot of a oil trust fund NGO (which was given US government blessings for a status change to 'charity' -- so it can collect FUNDS and LOBBY the US politicians.).

What's perverse is that if the anti-Russian propaganda was directed at any other group, it would (probably) be considered 'hate speech' or inciting violence or some other *card* that's regularly pulled in the west to shut down discourse.

Quite frankly, I wouldn't take as gospel what's written in mainstream western media.

But getting back to Gaza, are they denying that Gaza's under attack?  Of course not.

** But they are strengthening the notion that social media is 'unreliable', and quietly seeking to undermine social media reports and information -- so that you can be more reliant on what they want to tell you through mainstream news.  LOL.

Why would Israel need 400 students to send a message.  Israel is set.  Its strategic importance is such that the west (and major financial backer, US) will never interfere - it has carte blache in the region.

Bombs away.

[excuse typos...rushed.]

GUARDIAN vs ITAR-TAS - UK vs RUSSIA

THE GUARDIAN

Russia withdraws delegates from Farnborough air show

Further diplomatic fallout from Ukraine crisis as Kremlin's head of defence pulls state officials following UK snub

Russian deputy prime minister Dmitry Rogozin has told his country's defence delegates to withdraw from the Farnborough International Air Show and return home after being snubbed by the British government over the Ukraine conflict.

The latest diplomatic incident came at the opening of the aerospace and defence industry's major sales fair in Hampshire and followed the UK government's efforts to actively discourage Russian attendance at the show. This year's show is marked by a visit from the British prime minister, David Cameron. [DISCOURAGED?]  [SANCTIONS] [NAAAH, DAVID CAMERON'S PLANNED SPEECH.]

"I recommend our delegation to wind up its participation in the show and return home," Rogozin, who heads Russia's defence sector, tweeted.

The UK government traditionally invites representatives from selected foreign governments to attend Farnborough as its guests, but this year said that "due to Russian actions in Ukraine, no representatives from the Russian government have been issued [UK government] invitations to Farnborough". [RUSSIA IS NOT IN THE UKRAINE - IT'S THE US THAT'S IN THERE.]

It added: "The government has also taken clear action to remove Russia from the list of countries eligible to use open general export licences, in order to discourage Russian attendance at [the show] … no foreign government representatives attending [Farnborough] as guests of [the UK government] will be escorted around the Russian pavilion by officials." [SANCTIONS]

The UK government action does not affect Russian businesses exhibiting at the show. This year a Russian state-owned arms firm, which supplied attack helicopters and grenade launchers to the Syrian regime, is exhibiting fighter jets.

...

SOURCE - The Guardian -  http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jul/14/russia-withdraws-delegates-farnborough-air-show-ukraine - here.

--------------------------------------------------------

ITAR-TASS

Still no explanations from London re visas for Russian delegation to air show

© ITAR-TASS/Marina Lisceva

Russian Foreign Ministry building in Moscow  
Moscow to respond reciprocally to UK refusal to issue visas to Russian officials

FARNBOROUGH, July 14. /ITAR-TASS/. Official London has so far not given any reply to the Russian Embassy’s inquiry regarding its refusal to issue British visas to a large number of Russian officials who planned to attend the Farnborough International Airshow, Russian Ambassador to Britain Alexander Yakovenko said on Monday, July 14.

“Britain on Saturday made a statement that the refusal to issue the visas was connected with the Ukrainian issue: 347 members of the Russian delegation requested visas, only 167 received them. We will be analysing all this now because it all happened very quickly. On Friday, when we realised that there were serious problems with ensuring the presence of the Russian delegation at Farnborough, we wrote a note and made an official inquiry,” Yakovenko said.

“The first thing we asked was to give us explanations why visas had been denied to the Russian participants. Second, we urged the British authorities to correct the situation in the remaining several days - Friday, Saturday and Sunday. We have not received any written reply to our inquiries so far,” he said.

Visa denied to Russian airshow delegation siitgn of “unhealthy competition” — official

“Let me tell you frankly: I cannot understand the logic (of London’s decisions). The British authorities say that the reason for not issuing the visas to certain individuals was the position (of Moscow) on Ukraine and the British are not cooperating with us at the official level. On the other hand, if we are to follow this logic, those who ensure safe operation of the exhibits are obviously not in this category but most of them were not given visas either,” the diplomat said.

“I think there is no logic there. But we will be discussing and analysing all these issues: who were denied the visas and why, and whether these were just delays or refusals. There were three major events this year and visas were not issued on time but several days after they had started or even ended” which resulted in “serious losses” for the Russian delegations, Yakovenko said.

“Farnborough is not only for British participants but also for representatives of a large number of other countries” with which the Russian delegation is making contacts during the show. “Naturally, the meetings that were planned will take place,” Yakovenko said but added that “a considerable part of Russian senior officials from our companies were not given visas” even though “mid-level officials received visas”. “All this has to be analysed and conclusions have to be made,” the diplomat said.

He took a tour of the Russian exhibition and said “our companies have no complaints against the organizers”.

“Let us not make guesses. We have not received any explanations yet. When we get them, we will see what Great Britain’s position is. We are not going to engage in guesswork for them. Russia’s position of principle is that we are ready to work with Britain as much as they are prepared to work with us. We will cooperate in the areas that remain open. If Britain closes some areas to sort of isolate itself from cooperation with Russia, this will also be a fact of life and we will take note of it,” Yakovenko said.

Moscow regards London’s refusal to issue visas to Russian participants in the Farnborough air show as “conspicuously unfriendly” and reserves the right to respond reciprocally, Foreign Ministry deputy spokesman Yuri Matery said.

“In fact, although the documents were filed in advance, the main part of the Russian official delegation that was planning to take part in the Farnborough International Airshow-2014 which opened on July 14 will most likely be unable to come as they have not been issued British visas,” he said.

Matery recalled that a high-level delegation of officials from the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Federal Space Agency, the Federal Agency for Air Transportation, Russian Technologies, the Corporation Irkut, Rosoboronexport, MiG Corporation, Sukhoi Company and other interested companies was planning to travel to Britain to attend the exhibition and conduct talks with a large number of international participants.

“Technical personnel who attend to the exhibits, which have already been delivered for demonstration at the air show, were not issued British visas either. The Embassy of the Russian Federation in Great Britain has sent a note to the Foreign Office requesting explanations,” the spokesperson said.

This situation legitimately makes us feel indignant. We have always thought that as the organiser of major international events Great Britain would be interested in their success and in having as representative delegations at them as possible Yuri Matery Foreign Ministry deputy spokesman “This situation legitimately makes us feel indignant. We have always thought that as the organiser of major international events Great Britain would be interested in their success and in having as representative delegations at them as possible,” he said.

“This is not the first incident with visas for members of the Russian official delegation to the Farnborough air show. Similar incidents also happened at other international forums in Britain, including a natural food show in April of this year and Info Security Europe 2014 this summer,” the diplomat said. [RECURRENT]

“We consider such actions on the part of the British authorities conspicuously unfriendly and expect their official explanations with regard to the situation that does not fit into notion of normal interstate relations,” Matery said. “We reserve the right to respond reciprocally, as is customary in diplomatic practice,” he added.

The Farnborough International Airshow, which will work until July 20, is one of the major air shows in the world. Leading aircraft and spacecraft manufacturers present their latest achievements and make deals there. Last year, about 72 billion U.S. dollars’ worth of contracts and agreements were signed at the show.

SOURCE - ITAR-TAS: WORLD - here.

--------------------------------------------------------

COMMENT

The Guardian says one thing; ITAR-TASS says another.

ITAR-TAS said out of 347 delegates only 167 received Visas.

ITAR-TAS says Russian Embassador to UK is STILL waiting on an explanation.

Seems like The Guardian knows more than Russia's ambassador to UK.

Much is made of a tweet from Dmitry Rogozin:

I suggest that our delegation halts participation in the Expo and goes back home... [LINK TO ITAR-TASS] (cont) tl.gd/n_1s2fook

No idea what to make of that, aside from he's had enough of being jerked around waiting to hear from London.  Remember, it's been a few days.

What I do notice is that the UK show is now by 'special invitation'.  LOL.

Oh, and the Russians were 'discouraged' from attending.  

Why would you discourage representatives from country of equal standing from attending a trade fair?

So now it's closed shop?  But UK presumably expects cooperation etc from the Russians.

How do you insult a country and then expect to have any kind of decent relations with them?

followed the UK government's efforts to actively discourage Russian attendance at the show. This year's show is marked by a visit from the British prime minister, David Cameron.

Note the bit about David Cameron attending?  Well, we know what that's all about.

So if they've been discouraging Russia from attending (as per above quote from The Guardian), does that mean that they knew well in advance that this was David Cameron's triumphant moment -- and they didn't want it marred by the 'enemy' in the camp?  LOL

As if you could make an announcement about raising war funds while your targets are your guests.  

this year said that "due to Russian actions in Ukraine, no representatives from the Russian government have been issued [UK government] invitations to Farnborough".

So now the Russian's are gate-crashing? 

Russia has had zero actions in the Ukraine.  It's the US that's active in the Ukraine.

So all of this is really warped.

UK has its big military announcement to make and it would be inconvenient for the Russians to BE there; end of.

 

NATO GANG UP & ISOLATE RUSSIA - PROPAGANDA TARGETING RUSSIA

NATO Leaders Prepare Response to Russia's Information Warfare

By Sam Jones, Financial Times

July 14, 2014


Nato has been shaken by the effectiveness of Russia's online information war during the Ukraine conflict and is now looking for ways to counter the country's aggressive propaganda campaigns , the UK ambassador [Adam Thomson] to the world's largest military alliance has said. . . .

"The summit will take decisions on Nato's long-term posture," Mr Thomson said. "Some of that will be military steps, some of it will be steps to address these new tactics [military planning?], which we are thinking about hard right now."

"How do you counter Russian propaganda? How do we do better on cyber defence? How do we improve our intelligence collaboration so we have better situational awareness if you've got unbadged soldiers operating on alliance territory?"

Pro-Nato think-tanks, military organisations linked to member states and Nato itself have been the target of internet trolling campaigns, traditional media disinformation and cyber attacks designed to bolster domestic support and attack foreign opponents, in traditional media and online. Senior Nato officials have told the FT they are in little doubt that such activities are orchestrated on a large scale by the Russian government. . . .

"Nato [needs] to be able to pop the Russian myths that are propagated about Nato itself... it needs to be able to look after its own equity in this, if you like," he said.

SOURCE - Atlantic Council - here.

----------------------------------------
COMMENT

Love the 'trolling campaigns' they're referring to.  Notice the arrogance? 

What a way to dismiss everybody that doesn't fall into line with US-EU expansionist objectives, eh?

People see through what's going on.

Mind you, this isn't about Russia; this is about US-NATO and their objectives and their propaganda.

The accusation is just something they've pulled out of their hats, because they're masters of manipulating the public; they're professional, practised liars.  Like lawyers and used car salesmen are. 

This is political spin delivered by the unscrupulous; they're vilifying Russia -- who has been cast as  'enemy' and an 'aggressive' one at that (but no Russian action ... it's US soldiers on European soil).

Need to do this because they must create an enemy to sell their predetermined commitment to piling billions of dollars  from the public purse to the NATO war chsest, to fund the corporate snatch happening in Eastern Europe.

It's necessary to create a boogey man to:

(a) justify their expansion and aggression; and
(b) to obtain public acceptance of their objectives, by whatever means it takes.

NO, LET'S GET NAOM CHOMSKY

TO POP THE US-NATO MYTH

 

NO, LET'S GET NAOM CHOMSKY

TO POP THE US-NATO MYTH

Another beauty:

"Nato [needs] to be able to pop the Russian myths that are propagated about Nato itself... it needs to be able to look after its own equity in this ...

Did that guy refer to NATO's 'equity'?  LOL. 

Yep.  Equity is all they have on their minds. 

It's all about looking after US corporate interests ... and the residual interests (if any) go to corporate interests in UK, France and Germany.

NATO and the EU are US tools primarily for US advantage.

US has created a gang of extra-national bodies that it uses to further American (and allied corporate interests) across Europe - like it or not.

Typical.  US won't even get out of Cuban territory:

Guantánamo Bay

The United States assumed territorial control over the southern portion of Guantánamo Bay under the 1903 Cuban–American Treaty.  The United States exercises complete jurisdiction and control over this territory, while recognizing that Cuba retains ultimate sovereignty.

The current government of Cuba regards the U.S. presence in Guantánamo Bay as illegal and insists the Cuban–American Treaty was obtained by threat of force and is in violation of international law. Some legal scholars judge that the lease may be voidable.  [wikipedia]

So what does that tell you?

If you want to see American propaganda in action hosted by the British, check out this post.

It's a BBC presentation; article and video.

The narrator presents a the-world-hates-Russia 1:54 minute video that pops up automatically ... and the narrator goes on about figures supposedly obtained from a NGO/charity ... a survey conducted RIGHT AROUND THE WORLD ... LOL ... and the world hates Russia (er, except for a handful of countries).

It is absolutely laughable.

This mob that's supposedly provided the survey is an off-shoot of an oil trust fund and there's serious money (and serious oil corporation interests associated) with the 'surveyor'.

Link to blog article is here.

The unsuspecting viewer of that BBC material wouldn't take the trouble to investigate where this 'survey' is coming from.  Most people passively accept information that's aired.  What a cheek.

But, wait, there's more folks:

Russian company representatives were denied visas they'd arranged MONTHS in advance with the UK, so they were denied attendance at an annual trade show (Farnsborough airshow) where business interests associated with military and corporate aviation, show their wares.  Link to blog post - here.

At the time, I concluded that the UK was being very petty and it struck me as a dishonourable way to behave, so I wrote it off as something inexplicable and petty.

Well, it turns out there was an agenda in place -- or that's how it comes across to me.

David Cameron, according to Reuters, will be announcing a $billions commitment to military spending ... at the Farnsborough air show!

On its own that doesn't mean a lot, I'm guessing.

• But when you are vilifying a nation (as the BBC and US have been vilifying Russia); and
• when you cut them out of the picture;
• when make a concerted effort to falsely depict Russia as the aggressor (when Russia's within own borders);
• when you dramatically boost military spending and presence of troops on European soil;

-- the combination of all those factors shows that cutting Russia out by not having visas ready wasn't just an administrative oversight (as if ... this is months of planning).

It also shows it's a very deliberate and chilling isolation of Russia, while painting Russia as the aggressor.

Of course, it's to justify to the populace why public monies must be spent on military while welfare spending doesn't get a look in.

The choice of the air show to make the announcement is revealing.  Perfect place for such a happy announcement -- sweetened with 'jobs' and 'improved technology'.

Anyway, if anyone's interested in propaganda, check out the posts in relation to military spending - here - and post in relation to the no-visa-for-Russians (and no air show) - here.



[Excuse any typo's - in a rush.]

PS -- they've put billions into the Ukraine snatch - here.  Must see.

UK - Sprung - Cameron putting spin on military spending & tactically manipulating the gulible

RE:  CAMERON ANNOUNCEMENT  BILLIONS ON MILITARY SPENDING -- TO BE MADE AT FARNBOROUGH AIR SHOW

For background, Blog Post:  here.


RE;  RUSSIANS DENIED ENTRY TO UK ... FOR AIRSHOW
For background, Blog Post:  here.


OMG!!!

This is why the Russians' visas were 'bungled' and why the Russians - who prepared months in advance with UK for the event -- were denied access to the country and to the event!

It wouldn't do to have Russians at an air-show while announcing to the public that you're going to bust their balls with military spending in the billions (dancing to the tune of US lol) ... you've got to make sure that the 'bad guy' -- remember, the one you painted as 'aggressive' and a 'threat' -- isn't around when you're relying on this 'threat' excuse as the reason for cutting public funding & coughing up all that lovely $$$$ from the public purse.

As the US journalist said, you need the spectre of threat to get this across to the public.

LOL.

SPRUNG.

How long had they been planning this?  And I thought it was pettiness that denied Russians visas.  Nope.
It's a deliberate, determined political machine (& war machine?).

BBC ANTI-RUSSIA PROPAGANDA - FOR US CORPORATE PHARAOHS

ORDER of appearance in post:

1.  BBC article/video.
2.  Background research on survey provider, including trail of companies.
3.  Poster's analysis & commentary regarding video presentation linked to BBC story.
4.  Poster's comments.
5.  Poster's conclusion.

WARNING:  it is quite a lengthy post.  But worth checking out.  LOL.
---------------------------------------------------

BBC ARTICLE INFOTAINMENT PROPAGANDA

Negative views of Russia and Putin on the rise globally

2 hours ago [UNDATED]

Russia's global image is increasingly negative, according to a nsurvey from the Pew Research Center.

This is despite Russians believing that President Vladimir Putin's actions in Ukraine would improve the country's reputation abroad.

Pew Research found that increasing numbers of people around the world held unfavourable views of Russia and its president, especially in Europe and the United States.

And as the violence in Ukraine continues, 60% of people there had negative views of Russia - a huge increase from 11% in 2011.

The BBC's Ashley Semler looks at the results.

Edited by Dave Mayers

Source:  BBC News Magazine - here.
--------------------------------------------------- 
POSTER:  RESEARCH / COMMENT

BBC

Type ....................... Public corporation with a Royal Charter
Industry ................. Mass media
Predecessor(s) ...... British Broadcasting Company
Founded  ...............18 October 1922

Headquarters     Broadcasting House, London, England, United Kingdom
Area served       Worldwide

Products     Broadcasting, radio, web portals
Services     Television, radio, online
Revenue     £5.102 billion (2012/13)

Owner(s)     Government of United Kingdom 

[wikipedia]
---------------------------------------------------
Pew Research Centre (funds survey organisation)

The Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan American think tank based in Washington, D.C., that provides information on social issues, public opinion, and demographic trends shaping the United States and the world. 

Budget .......... $250m
Endowment ... $5 billion 

Established by Pew Charitable Trusts:

The Pew Charitable Trusts is an independent non-profit, non-governmental organization (NGO), founded in 1948.

With over US$5 billion in assets, its stated mission is to serve the public interest by "improving public policy, informing the public, and stimulating civic life" ...

The Trusts, a single entity, is the successor to, and sole beneficiary of, 7 charitable funds established between 1948-79 by ... —the adult sons and daughters of Sun Oil Company founder Joseph N. Pew ...

Controversy - alleged theft of $25billion (@ 2009 value) art collection

The controversy involving Pew, other donors, the Barnes trustees and the collection was the subject of the documentary film The Art of the Steal. The Trusts did not participate in the film. Rebecca Rimel, head of the Pew Charitable Trusts, said they believed the film would not be fair. 

[wikipedia]
---------------------------------------------------
Sun Oil Company

Sunoco Inc. is an American petroleum and petrochemical manufacturer headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, formerly known as Sun Company Inc. (1886–1920 and 1976–1998) and Sun Oil Co. (1920–1976). Sunoco is one of the largest gasoline distribution companies in the United States  ...

Sunco Inc

Type .................... Subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners

Traded as ............. NYSE: SUN

Industry               Oil and gas

Founded                Pittsburgh, PA, U.S. (1886 as Sun Company Inc.)

Founder(s)             Joseph Newton Pew

Philip Pisano

Edward O. Emerson

Headquarters          Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.

Area served            Worldwide

Key people             Robert W. Owens President, CEO

Products                 Petrochemical

Petroleum
Fuel
Lubricants

[wikipedia]
---------------------------------------------------
Energy Transfer Partners

Energy Transfer Equity was founded in 1995  and is currently headquartered in Dallas, Texas. They currently employ 5,000 individuals including the founder, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, Kelcy Warren.

Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.  ... owning and operating one of the largest and most diversified portfolios of energy assets in the United States.

Type     ............... Public
Traded as    ........ NYSE: ETP
Industry    ........... Energy
Founded    ......... 1995
Headquarters ..... Dallas, Texas
Products    ......... natural gas, propane
Employees ......... 5000+
Subsidiaries ....... Southern Union Company
.......................... Sunoco

Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.

2012 merger of a wholly owned subsidiary of ETP (with Sunoco)

ETP .. acquired ...interests, 100% of the incentive distribution rights, and a 32.4% ...interest in Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P.

SUNCO - operates a geographically diverse portfolio of crude oil and refined products pipelines, terminalling and crude oil acquisition and marketing assets.

ETP also holds a 70% interest in Lone Star NGL, a joint venture that owns and operates natural gas liquids storage...[u]fractionation and transportation assets[/u] in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.

ETP holds controlling interest in a corporation (ETP Holdco Corporation) (that owns Southern Union Company)

Sunoco, Inc. ETP’s general partner is owned by ETE.

Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. ...owns the general partner and 100% of the incentive distribution rights (IDRs) of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.

Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. ...owns approximately 50.2 million ETP limited partner units; and owns the general partner and 100% of the IDRs of Regency Energy Partners LP and approximately 26.3 million RGP limited partner units.

ETE also owns a non-controlling interest in a corporation (ETP Holdco Corporation) that owns Southern Union Company and Sunoco, Inc.

The ETE family of companies owns approximately 69,000 miles of natural gas, natural gas liquids, refined products, and crude pipelines...
[wikipedia]
---------------------------------------------------

Back to - source of Survey: 
Pew Research Centre (funded by Pew Charitable Trusts)

Between 1957 and 1979, six other trusts were created, representing the personal and complementary philanthropic interests of the four siblings. The Trusts remains based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, with an office in Washington, D.C.

Although today the Pew Charitable Trusts is non-partisan and non-ideological, Joseph Pew and his heirs were themselves politically conservative. The mission of the J. Howard Pew Freedom Trust, one of the seven funds, was to:


"acquaint the American people with the evils of bureaucracy and the values of a free market and to inform our people of the struggle, persecution, hardship, sacrifice and death by which freedom of the individual was won". Joseph N. Pew, Jr. called Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal "a gigantic scheme to raze U.S. businesses to a dead level and debase the citizenry into a mass of ballot-casting serfs".


Early priorities of the Pew Memorial Trust included cancer research, the American Red Cross, and a pioneering project to assist historically black colleges. Later beneficiaries included conservative organizations such as the John Birch Society, the American Liberty League, and the American Enterprise Institute, as well as environmental organizations such as the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Oceana, and mainstream think tanks like the Brookings Institution. ...

In 2004, the Pew Trusts applied to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to change its status from private foundation to nonprofit organization. Since the Pew's change to a charitable foundation, it can now raise funds freely and devote up to 5% of its budget to lobbying the public sector.

According to the Pew's 2009 Annual Report, five of the twelve Directors serving on the Board are named Pew. Two of the five are physicians.

Pew's environmental portfolio is designed to help meet what they view as one of the seminal challenges of our time: saving the natural environment and protecting the rich array of life it supports. [LOL - is this aim compatible with energy resources sector activities?]


The aim is to strengthen environmental policies and practices in ways that produce significant and measurable protection for terrestrial and marine systems worldwide. In doing so, Pew works to advance scientific understanding of the causes and consequences of environmental problems, design innovative policy solutions to these problems and mobilize public support for their implementation. [Oh, sure.  I'd love a look at what they're involved in on that front.]

Efforts are focused on reducing the scope and severity of three major global environmental problems:

Destruction of the world's oceans, with a particular emphasis on marine fisheries.

The loss of large wilderness ecosystems that contain a great part of the world's remaining biodiversity.
Changes to the Earth's physical and biological systems linked to the build-up of greenhouse gases that are altering the world's climate.

The Trusts also funds the Pew Research Center, the third-largest think tank in Washington DC, after the Brookings Institution and the Center for American Progress.

[wikipedia]
---------------------------------------------------

COMMENT


RE: BBC MAGAZINE ARTICLE & VIDEO


Found my first piece of obviously perverse political propaganda, courtesy of the BBC.


It seems an innocuous little entertainment piece in the 'BBC Magazine' section of the site.

On linking to the 'Negative views of Russia and Putin on the rise globally' article at BBC, a little 1:54 minute video with girly narrator automatically launches itself.

[Grim looking static image of Putin 'staring' at us.]

[Russian sounding string instrument music.]

It tells us that Putin's 'global image has taken a turn for the worst in the past year'.


It launches into what Russians allegedly thought would be the outcome of Putin's alleged involvement 'this spring' in the Ukraine would accomplish for the impression of Russia (ie that it would 'lead to a more favourable opinion of Russia around the world, but ...').

Russia's involvement in the Ukraine?

As far as I am aware, there is plenty of US involvement in the Ukraine and Russia is within its own borders.  LOL.

Did the US 'charity' survey the Russian populance and if so, how?

Of course they bleeding didn't.

Girly narrator states:  "the opposite seems to be true."

Hey, did they do a Russian survey or didn't they?  LOL.

Oooh, a "new survey from the 'nusurvey' from the Pew Institute Centre found that Russia is increasing unpopular in many countries, especially in Europe and the United States.

[Cut to Obama (in Poland ... (Polish flag & coat of arms is on display)]
Obama is shown forcefully announcing:

 "We will not accept Russia's occupation of Crimea or its violation of Ukraine sovereignty", 

 while Obama gestures with a pointed-finger for emphasis, at the podium.

[Cut to US flag]
"Disapproval has surged the most in the US ..."

[quote alleged US disapproval figures, which mean jack]

Narrator claims that unfavourable views have increased this year in all of the European countries surveyed (except Greece) [but who cares about that ...LOL]

"Violence in Ukraine continues..." the narrator states.  But what is not stated is that this is US backed and supported violence against eastern Ukrainians, perpetrated by a Ukraine puppet government that gained ascension through violent insurrection of ultra-nationalist extremist groups, with the blessings of the US (who seek to further their selfish corporate and strategic interests in the region).

"As violence in Ukraine continues, it's neighbour Poland, once part of the Soviet Union, is growing much more wary of the former cold war power." the narrator states.
[Bear in mind,  the violence the narrator refers to is Ukraine puppet government violence against eastern Ukrainians.  Bear in mind also, Poland is now a US puppet.]

[CUT to masked paramilitary guy and Russian hat wearing guy] 

"After Russia annexed Crimea .... "   [quote dubious figures]

"Ukrainians have a negative view of the country  [ie Russia]

"When asked about President Putin specifically 73% of Ukrainians expressed disappointment in his handling of foreign affairs", the narrator states.

[Did they interview all Ukrainians, or was it just some? LOL]

[What is implied here is that a majority of Ukrainians disapprove of Putin and of Russia.  

We are not in a position to evaluate survey methodology (or information regarding the population SAMPLES allegedly surveyed in Ukraine or anywhere else in the world), so this 'information' from such-and-such organisation is really useless.]

[CUT to drawing of Ukraine split down the middle with 89% disapproval on the Western side & 66% disapproval on the Eastern side of Ukraine.]

[Once again, where are these figures coming from -- who surveyed the entire country?]

"But that's complicated by geography...", the narrator states before...

[CUT to drawing of Crimea]

"...only 5%in Crimea said the same"... [So when was the whole of Crimea surveyed?]

[CUT to pretty globe turning...]

"And when other countries were asked about Putin, majorities in only a handful said they had confidence in him -- ALL IN AFRICA & ASIA."  
[OK, now it's absolutely clear that his 'survey' is a complete load of manure.]

Note the other countries.  What they're doing is holding out that right across the globe, Russia and Putin are disapproved of (except in a 'handful of countries') [LOL].  But they are conveying this dubious 'survey' information with absolutely no leg to stand on:  the 'survey' authority is laughable and worthless.

[CUT to pretty two-globe graphic (on the reference to 'only a handful') -- and display the words:

KENYA
TANZANIA
VIETNAM
CHINA
BANGLADESH

on pretty double-globe graphic as the words:

 "all in Africa and Asia" are stated by the female narrator.

Bear in mind, this alleged global survey is tied to Putin & Russia's 'ACTION' in Ukraine -- where there HAS BEEN NO ACTION TO DATE.

"But as the rest of the world seems to be turning on Russia, the Russians themselves are feeling more patriotic than ever.  Pride in their country is up almost ...".

[Sorry, American oil-trust funded NGO turned 'charity', I don't buy your survey in relation to Russia or the 'world'.]

"Ashley Sadler, BBC News" says a twangy female narrator, who is either "Ashleigh" or "Ashley", presumably.

Well, isn't Ashley Sadler quite the authority there at BBC news.  LOL.

[EDIT * the name of video narrator is:  Ashley Semler, as per article above.  Apologies, I was going by audio. ]

---------------------------------------------------
 CONCLUSION

It is extremely dangerous to passively accept information conveyed, even from seemingly respectable and reliable news and information sources.

The morality of seeking to influence a passive public in this way is highly questionable; as is having a state run media group (BBC) that is clearly NOT INDEPENDENT from the State.

Very disappointed in the BBC.

How many readers and viewers of this type of propaganda are going to take the trouble to check all facts and all sources associated with the subject, and dig up facts associated with the ultimate source of the information the news entity relies upon?

Basically, nobody is going to go into fine tooth comb fact checking.

The beauty of this little production piece is that it teaches many things about power, corporations, government, NGOs, charities, hijacking of causes, corporate expansionism and imperialism, propaganda and so on:

The piece is a perfect example of propaganda.  Short and sweet.  And full of shit.


The Obama cut-to gave Obama/US a 'soundbite', which is an example of how powerful this type of communication (and adamant finger-pointing visual) is as a tool.

The survey itself is dubious.

Come on people, how did this 'nsurvey' mob interview the populace of the entire planet?

The 'survey' (if it ever actually happened) and the 'figures' are irrelevant because these people do not have access to the populations of an entire planet (or even entire countries) - and however much funding they receive, their survey (if any) is a sample, conducted to represent what is in line with their aims (LOL).


The imagery of Obama was positive and supposedly concerned for 'sovereignty' -- where US itself violates sovereignty worldwide and, really, has no business in Europe.

That argument aside, where was the concern for the elected government of the Ukraine -- and its sovereignty and laws - when groups of US enabled thugs drove the government from its elected position?

Obama is portrayed as commanding, effectual, adamant about Russia's occupation of Crimea and defender, adamant about the importance of protecting the sovereingty of the Ukraine.

The stark, unpalatable, stomach sickening reality is that it is corporate American interests that are annexing the Ukraine, and Obama is their spokesperson and figurehead.

Congress is funding Obama's push into the Ukraine -- and we're talking big dollars, people.

Who controls US politics?  It's corporations.  The government is there to do the bidding of corporate interests.

Colossal US political machinery and cash funding have now pretty much usurped the sovereignty of Ukraine, as the US puppet government in the Ukraine seems to have sold their country to corporate America.

The Russian imagery is negative:

• unpleasing image of Putin.
• scarey looking paramilitary figure in fatigues and black blaclava and what appears to be a rabble of guys, one of whom is wearing a Russian fluffy hat.

But, of course.  That's part and parcel of such a piece.

Note the presence of NGO turned 'charity' and the presence of 'think tank'.
BEWARE:  NGO, charity & think tank.  In fact, don't take candy from strangers.  LOL.
BEWARE:  organisations that are survey or polling organisations. 

The accusations that Obama (and his vast corporate-government machine) level at Russia, are the very things Obama and corporate America are guilty of.  So, people, beware the preacher man.

What this has also shown me is that there is no 'US government'; it's just one large corporate-run machine that serves corporate interests first and foremost.

The people' of this colossal 'democracy' are not represented; they're fooled.

The lofty US ideals we've all been fed on in made-in-America TV and in movies (right around the world), are about as real as God, Santa Clause or the Tooth Fairy.

It has taken me all my life to rub the sleep from my eyes and to finally come to this realisation.

We are all nothing but pawn-slaves to Corporate Pharaohs of this world.

------------------
 NOTE WELL:

In 2004, the Pew Trusts applied to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to change its status from private foundation to nonprofit organization. Since the Pew's change to a charitable foundation, it can now raise funds freely and devote up to 5% of its budget to lobbying the public sector.

According to the Pew's 2009 Annual Report, five of the twelve Directors serving on the Board are named Pew.

**** can now raise funds freely and devote up to 5% of its budget to lobbying the public sector.

So government has now allowed the trust to raise colossal corporate (& billionaire patron) funding to interfere with government.

Five percent of my budget is fuck all.  But 5% of a budget that is virtually unlimited in corporate America, amounts to a great deal of  public sector lobbbying influence.

On top of that, five out of 12 Directors of the Trusts are named Pew.   Hello, people?  The guess is they've not been disinherited.  Can anyone say oil corporate interests?

Oh and how about the nerve of the benefactor who established the trusts:

ie the 'evils of bureaucracy' (ie that means GOVERNMENT for the people) and singing the praises of a FREE MARKET (a free for all for corporate America, more like it)?

That was the mission of the trusts that were founded by Pew.


End comment.

[All research sourced at:  wikipedia]