Thread: NATO accuses Russia of fake news, while hysterically warning of WWIII

You gotta love the western media.

News media organizations in NATO member countries have no qualms about repeating unfounded, reckless claims of an imminent invasion of Europe by the Russian military, even threatening to ignite World War Three.
Yet when it comes to Russian media presenting valid alternative perspectives on a range of international issues, the Western alliance chokes up with accusations of Russian “fake news.”

“NATO says it sees a sharp rise in fake Russian news since the seizure of Crimea,” reported Reuters recently, ignorant of the fact that its own headline was itself purveying fake news.

Such ignorance is rampant among Western media and symptomatic of massive group-think demonizing Russia.

For a start, Russia did not seize Crimea, as is routinely stated in Western media as if fact. The people of the Crimean Peninsula voted in a legally constituted referendum in March 2014 to join Russia’s jurisdiction. But Reuters in the above headline uses the words “seizure of Crimea” without any qualification as if the historic referendum to join Russia was airbrushed out of history.

This is just one example of the daily distortion about Russian relations that is perpetrated in the Western media. If any side is guilty of peddling fake news, it is the Western news media of the NATO military alliance. And on an industrial scale.

For instance, earlier this month, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour conducted an interview with Marine Le Pen, the French leader of the Front National. Amanpour was aghast when Le Pen expressed the view that Russia did not annex Crimea and that the Maidan protests in Kiev in February 2014 were a coup d’état against an elected government. Amanpour’s shocked demeanor was understandable because she has on countless occasions asserted the opposite, as well as claiming Russia has “invaded Ukraine.” In each case, it can be argued the CNN celebrity journalist is wrong in her assertions about Russia-Ukraine relations, which means that she and her cable news employer are guilty of habitually churning out fake news.

Another instance of casual fake news presented as professional journalism was the BBC program GMT presented by Stephen Sackur on 3 February. Sackur, like Amanpour, is another celebrity journalist with preening self-importance. His program was reporting on the surge in violence in eastern Ukraine. Specifically, the report aired by the BBC implicated pro-Russian rebels in Donetsk region for shelling the town of Avdeevka. The insinuation was that Russia was stoking the violence. But only days before, the BBC broadcast video footage showing tanks belonging to the Kiev regime’s military taking up positions near homes in Avdeevka – in violation of the Minsk ceasefire.

Furthermore, the BBC’s Sackur then ran an interview with Kiev’s former prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, in which he was permitted to spout claims purporting as facts without ever being challenged. Those claims included: “Russian aggression in Ukraine” and “Russia shot down the Malaysian MH17 civilian airliner in July 2014 over eastern Ukraine."

Again, the point here is just how casually, and routinely Western mainstream media commit acts of fake news, which are presented as if fact by their “star journalists.”

Whatever Russian news media are accused of regarding fake news it is incomparable to the massive, systematic scale of fabrications and distortions churned out by the news media in NATO member countries.

NATO claims that it has listed over 30 “myths” the Russian news media have published. Unhelpfully, the NATO list does not provide links to original Russian news articles where the alleged myths are said to have been published. But a cursory reading of the list quickly shows that the so-called myths are nothing more “offensive” than Russian counter-arguments or what may be deemed as counter-perspective. Is NATO saying that to have a different point of view is somehow illegitimate?

For example, NATO counts Russian “fake news” to include claims that:

NATO tried to “drag” Ukraine into its membership;

NATO provoked the Maidan protests;

NATO is trying to encircle Russia;

NATO’s operation in Afghanistan was a failure;

NATO’s operation in Libya was illegitimate;

These points and more besides are not falsifications or baseless propaganda. They are serious contentions that can be substantiated with documented facts and legal argument as well as maps of proliferating NATO military bases on Russia’s borders.

Indeed, such perspectives completely confound the stereotype views that are promulgated on a daily basis by the Western media. But that in no way qualifies the contrarian Russian view as “fake.” Moreover, one can say that such views presented by Russian media are vital to proper public interest and understanding.

It is an astounding reflection of Western hubris and indoctrination that NATO members’ news media have published the following news stories which are patently false or turn reality on its head.

For instance, Russian and Syrian forces were allegedly committing wholesale slaughter of civilians in the city of Aleppo. For weeks the Western news media were screaming about the alleged massacre, only for the Syrian city to be eventually liberated from Western-backed illegally armed militants, including proscribed terrorist groups. No such civilian massacre occurred, and Western media have not bothered since to visit Aleppo to report on the return to normal civilian life thanks to the liberation by Russian and Syrian forces.

Another instance of rampant fake news carried in Western media is that Russian hackers subverted the US presidential election to get Donald Trump into the White House. No proof of these tendentious claims has ever been presented.

Yet the same claims are now being aired over alleged Russian interference in European elections – even though German state intelligence recently reported there was no evidence of interference.

Let’s put the issue into perspective. Over the past year, British news media have published story after story claiming Russia was about to invade Europe and start World War III.

The Daily Express ran three such stories in June, July, and September.

It wasn’t just throw away tabloids that indulged in such reckless scaremongering. The supposedly more serious Independent ran at least two stories in May and September citing top military officials claiming that nuclear war could break out in 48 hours with Russia because of the latter’s “secret” invasion plans.

In November, the Guardian and other British news outlets, including the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, BBC, and Sky, echoed the view of MI5 chief Sir Ian Parker that “Russia is a growing threat to the UK.”

If British media reports were to be believed, then Europe and the whole northern hemisphere should have gone up in nuclear smoke several months ago.

Dealing in false news by NATO members’ media, as exemplified above, is not just wildly erroneous and unethical. It is illustrative of an orchestrated propaganda campaign to demonize Russia and recklessly create an atmosphere for global war.

In this context, to accuse Russian news media of “fake news” is a flagrant inversion of reality.

That NATO chiefs, Western governments, and the dutiful news media can get away with making such accusations is a disturbing sign of collective indoctrination. The irony of Western self-declared “free and independent” politicians and media behaving like an army of robots marching to war while accusing Russia of fake news is too much for words.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/377327-na...-myths-russia/

Don't scare the plebs!

Russia was the next Boogeyman after Iraq and Syria. Was on the cards years ago with the westerner geopolitical agenda.

Fuck me, I told you bitches on this forum back in 2008!

oh, but RT which is a Russian news network is unbiased, is a bringer of the truth..

These morons worship Putin the anti-globalist messiah who will deliver the world to authoritarianism, nationalism and anti-intellectualism.

Great comeback Humbert... very intellectual of you

But it's not about your fixation with Putin its about:

an orchestrated propaganda campaign to demonize Russia and recklessly create an atmosphere for global war.

nope..? Still don't get it..? Read that again:

create an atmosphere for global war

Yup... same Hawks, just different accents.

But oh... it's Russia and they really are a danger to the world.


When did the Hawks start getting the Liberals to do their dirty work for them..?

^ Still sucking Putin's micro penis I see.

note to snub... Putin is not a country

Funny how snub and humbert with their claimed Liberal intellect can see the deception in every US intervention from Chile to Iraq, but can't see the exact same parallels in the campaign against Russia.

Typical spoonfed Americans, being told which shadow they should jump at.

Good to see the cousins, having their normal intellectual debating skills.

So, what's new? Sensationalism and propaganda is as old as news media, anywhere in the world.

Mind you, on a side note, Brietbart and Fox have been carrying it to new heights.

We live in an age of alternative facts.

Originally Posted by Neo

note to snub... Putin is not a country

Not so big without the Mercator projection.

Yeah they do that so snub and humbert will be more afraid

Originally Posted by Neo

Funny how snub and humbert with their claimed Liberal intellect can see the deception in every US intervention from Chile to Iraq, but can't see the exact same parallels in the campaign against Russia.

Right poor Russia completely innocent of any wrong doing. Your "enlightened" viewpoint is laughable and completely naive.

Originally Posted by Neo

Typical spoonfed Americans

Oh the irony from a guy who gets most of his news from a Russian mouthpiece.

Snub the majority of people look at several news sources,to be able to come to a conclusion,though you and the other cloned Americans,are fed BS from a very early age and you eat it up,and never question anything.

Such a shame you can't see past your nose.

Yup... even when presented with the facts snub has trouble comprehending the message. Its like they say if you think you're crazy then you're probably not, snub doesn't think he's brainwashed...

Originally Posted by Neo

Yup... even when presented with the facts snub has trouble comprehending the message.

I understand it perfectly well. I refuse to wear the tinfoil hat that you nutters wear.

Originally Posted by Neo

snub doesn't think he's brainwashed.

I am not if I was I would be reading RT and agreeing with you two clowns.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by Neo

snub doesn't think he's brainwashed.

I am not if I was I would be reading RT and agreeing with you two clowns.

Irony in a nutshell.

^ Truth hurts eh?

When you're taking your "information" from Breitbart, RT and Fox it's no wonder your world view is a little distorted.

In fact, Chico has become so confused by it all - and it certainly doesn't take much in this man's case - that he's now championing Putin and Russia as the saviours of free speech and fair, unbiased reporting.

^ Ah finally a bit of sanity arrives.

Originally Posted by bsnub

^ Ah finally a bit of sanity arrives.

Let's just highlight this gem:

For a start, Russia did not seize Crimea, as is routinely stated in Western media as if fact. The people of the Crimean Peninsula voted in a legally constituted referendum in March 2014 to join Russia’s jurisdiction. But Reuters in the above headline uses the words “seizure of Crimea” without any qualification as if the historic referendum to join Russia was airbrushed out of history.

This was a referendum held after the Russian invasion, with Russian troops patrolling the streets, boycotted by the Tatar people, and where none of the two options on the ballot sheet allowed people to choose keeping the current status quo!

Sounds fair and reasonable.

Originally Posted by Maanaam

So, what's new? Sensationalism and propaganda is as old as news media, anywhere in the world.

Mind you, on a side note, Brietbart and Fox have been carrying it to new heights.

We live in an age of alternative facts.

This is spot on though. There has to be a bogeyman in the room to justify the huge spending in the US on its miltary and keep the people in a state of fear.

If my memory serves me correctly Pres Yanakovitch did an about face on closer thais wit the EU with virtually no consultation. The people protested and once Yanakovitch saw that the Tide of the people was against as well as the police force and some of the military he buggered off to Russia to save his Arse. New elections were held and a new president elected. That is not a coup d'tat. The ethnic Russians have no legal claim to Eastern Ukraine. It is part of Ukraine and cannot break away without a referndum of the whole country.
It is obvious to anyone with logic that the Eastern Russian ukranians wish to be part of Russia and are being armed and supplied by the Russian state. Its akin to any country with a high number of migrants in a particular region allowing those migrants to annex that territory and let it become part of their original homeland. Although popular by imperial powers in times gone by This is now considered a violation of international law.
The Crimea is a more tenuous argument as it was previously considered Russian territory and was ceded to Ukraine. The Crimeans therefore have a much stronger case, although the Unauthorised referendum was certainly not legal and the interference by Russia violates international law.
Before we start to wax lyrical about Putins' paradise. We should look at a few facts. A former ukraine opposition leader poisoned with Dioxin, Aleksander Litvanyenko poisoned with pollonium, close to 100 Russian journalists killed that warrant investigation. The low number of arrests. Then there was Boris Nemtsov the Russian opposion politician who was killed on the day before leading an opposition rally on the war in Ukraine. Although not evidence in itself of Putins involvement it certainly raises a number of questions. The number of people responsible for ordering these killings have virtually never been found or prosecuted. There appears to be an almost Messianic support for Putin by the majority of Russians.
The last Leaders to engender this type of support were Mao Tse Dung, Joseph Stalin, Kim il Sung and Hitler and we would do well to remember that.

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

Its akin to any country with a high number of migrants in a particular region allowing those migrants to annex that territory and let it become part of their original homeland.

It is not the first time they have done this either.

Putin.. blah blah blah... Crimea... blah blah blah.. Eastern Ukraine.. blah blah blah

Isn't it funny that to try and draw any comparison between what is essentially Russia's limited domestic hegemony and America's continuing global hegemony is answered by shrieks of peurile condemnation.

I wonder if any of you know any Russian people or have any source of information on Russia other than whichever flavor of media you consume. I think most probably not.

Originally Posted by Neo

I wonder if any of you know any Russian people or have any source of information on Russia other than whichever flavor of media you consume.

I know a couple of Russians here in the states, a couple of Ukrainians as well. For that matter I happen to know a few Poles, a Slav or two and even a Czech.

I have yet to hear one of them say that they are fond of Putin.