HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Catherina » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 134 Next »

Catherina

Profile Information

Name: Catherina
Gender: Female
Member since: Mon Mar 3, 2008, 02:08 PM
Number of posts: 34,318

About Me

\"Indeed, in my four-plus decades in journalism, I have never seen a more thoroughly biased and misleading performance by the major U.S. news media. Even during the days of Ronald Reagan – when much of the government’s modern propaganda structure was created – there was more independence in major news outlets. There were media stampedes off the reality cliff during George H.W. Bush’s Persian Gulf War and George W. Bush’s Iraq War, both of which were marked by demonstrably false claims that were readily swallowed by the big U.S. news outlets. But there is something utterly Orwellian in the current coverage of the Ukraine crisis, including accusing others of “propaganda” when their accounts – though surely not perfect – are much more honest and more accurate than what the U.S. press corps has been producing. There’s also the added risk that this latest failure by the U.S. press corps is occurring on the border of Russia, a nuclear-armed state that – along with the United States – could exterminate all life on the planet. The biased U.S. news coverage is now feeding into political demands to send U.S. military aid to Ukraine’s coup regime. The casualness of this propaganda – as it spreads across the U.S. media spectrum from Fox News to MSNBC, from the Washington Post to the New York Times – is not just wretched journalism but it is reckless malfeasance jeopardizing the lives of many Ukrainians and the future of the planet.\" Robert Parry, Ukraine, Through the US Looking Glass, April 16, 2014 http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/04/16-6

Journal Archives

Well he’s looking, he’s looking, he’s looking down




Well he’s looking, he’s looking, he’s looking down,
Hoping you’ll clean up this dirty old town.
Finish his battle, before it turns rotten,
Your granddad didn’t vote for fascists, he shot 'em.

Yeah he shot 'em, he shot 'em, he shot 'em down,
Fired his gun till they hit the ground.
So I hope, you’ve not forgotten:
Your granddad didn’t vote for fascists
He shot 'em
down.


"The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.

If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort... They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead.

-- Henry A. Wallace, FDR's second Vice President and the New Deal visionary before the corporate wing of the Democrat party refused to allow him to be FDR's VP for the next term and brought that corporate rat Harry Truman in. FDR almost turned down the democratic nomination because of that. "



In 1940, he was FDR's running mate and served as his vice president for four years. But in 1944, against the advice of the Democratic Party's progressives and liberals - including his wife Eleanor - FDR reluctantly allowed the party's conservative, pro-business and segregationist wing to replace Wallace with Sen. Harry Truman as the vice presidential candidate, a move that Stone calls the "greatest blunder" of Roosevelt's career. Had Wallace remained as vice president, he would have become president when FDR died in April 1945.

Wallace opposed the cold war, the arms race with the Soviet Union and racial segregation. He was a strong advocate of labor unions, national health insurance, public works jobs and women's equality. He would have been, without question, the most radical president in American history. He would have served out the remaining three years of FDR's fourth term and certainly would have sought to be elected on his own in 1948.

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/14297-henry-wallace-americas-forgotten-visionary

That's the reason for this coordinated war against RT. It's the same everywhere. Control the message

where everyone picked up their cue at the same time and started attacking it- because our propaganda department can't control it and dictate it's editorial content.

The US and European press (Ireland being a notable exception right now) are totally controlled. Under the Bush regime, democrats here openly admitted that the media was the 5th Estate, now suddenly we're supposed to believe that they became honest and objective overnight and, after their shameful record, take their word for things.

Here's just one example from last week where the New York Times was pushing the LIE that Merkel said Putin was unhinged
...

As for the German chancellory, it's not exactly endorsing the Times's account. Die Welt, the German newspaper, reported that "The chancellery was not pleased with the reporting on the conversation. They claim that what the chancellor said was that Putin has a different perception on Crimea, which is why she is pushing for a fact finding mission on the matter."

Government spokesman Jens Alberts told Claudia Himmelreich, a McClatchy special correspondent, exactly what the government said on Monday: no comment on the contents of the chancellor's confidential phone conversations -- with either Putin or Obama. In defining the German view, Alberts said he would "not dwell on reports and rumors of someone claiming she possibly said this or that. However, what is undisputed is that President Putin has a completely different view of the situation and the events on Crimea than the German government and our western allies."

A different view. Obviously. But unhinged?

So if Merkel didn't portray Putin as unhinged, why would the unknown Obama aide tell the New York Times she did? Because in the world of propaganda, successfully portraying your adversary as being crazy, without any rational backing to his actions, makes it unnecessary to try to understand the complexities or sensitivities of the issues. If Putin is crazy, then that's enough. We needn't think any further about what he has to say. And if the New York Times says he's crazy, that's good enough for the dozens of reporters who've come along since, repeating the comment to their millions of viewers and readers as if it was a confirmed statement.

...

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/03/05/3975981/did-angela-merkel-really-say-putin.html


and not just dozens of reporters either, thousands of propagandists followed suite.

Even Wolf Blitzer, a neocon supporter if there ever was one, is reined in from simply stating that the Russians said something.

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour was so eager to fly the American foreign policy flag that she pointedly took a colleague to task on air when he was guilty of nothing more than doing his job. Wolf Blitzer is a corporate media stalwart himself so he and everyone watching was surprised when Amanpour jumped down his throat when he quoted a Russian official.

"You heard Vitaly Churkin, the Russian ambassador to the U.N. Security Council, saying earlier today that at fault for all of this are what he called fascists and anti-Semites in Ukraine right now...’ said Blitzer.

‘You know, you've got to be really careful by putting that across as a fact,’ Amanpour said.

‘That's what Vitaly Churkin said,’ Blitzer replied.

‘He may have done," Amanpour said. ‘Are you telling me, are you saying that the entire pro-European ...’

‘Of course not,’ Blitzer defended, explaining that he was presenting what Churkin had said.

‘Right, and we have to be very careful,’ Amanpour cautioned.

Blitzer tried to interject, offering to play Churkin's comments again.

‘I heard it,’ Amanpour said. ‘We just as a network have to be really careful not to lump the entire pro-European Ukrainians into, which some may well be, nationalistic and extremist groups.’

‘We're not, I'm not,’ Blitzer insisted.”

Amanpour had lots of company at other networks. Gwen Ifill of PBS Newshour also stuck to the White House script with her guest, professor Stephen F. Cohen. Cohen informed viewers that American presidents going back to Bill Clinton have been playing a very dangerous game in their attempt to pry Ukraine from the Russian orbit.

Ifill was contemptuous of Cohen throughout and stuck to the Putin is evil meme. Her questions lacked even a pretense of a thoughtful search for facts. Nonsense such as “What is Putin’s endgame here?” was all she could muster. When Cohen gave a simple and understandable explanation of why western meddling posed a danger to world peace Ifill decided to ignore him. “Why is any of this important to anyone who is not in Russia or Ukraine?” Cohen, who also suffered through the Amanpour/Blitzer contretemps, gave Ifill as much contempt in return. “I told you at the top. I mean, you and I are old enough to have lived through divided Europe in Berlin.”

...

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/03/09-5


Robert Parry's last article is about this exact subject, media compliance after Reagan's successful war against moral equivalence.
Robert Parry: Reagan-Style Hypocrisy and the Ukraine Crisis


The same thing is going on in Europe. French news is a disgrace right now. So is German news. Every single country that stands to make a killing off this Ukraine thing has reined in the media.

German media campaigns for war in Ukraine
By Ulrich Rippert
7 March 2014

So-called liberal German media outlets such as the daily Süddeutsche Zeitung, Die Zeit, which is close to the Social Democratic Party (SPD), and the Green Party-aligned TAZ have responded to the intensification of the crisis in Ukraine with a vehement campaign for war. As though they had received their training in Goebbels’ propaganda ministry, some commentators are openly defending fascist parties, hailing anti-Semitic militias as freedom fighters, and calling for a military strike against Russia.

On Monday, TAZ Russian correspondent Klaus-Helge Donath railed against “Berlin’s cuddly diplomats” in a lead article. He accused the German government of allowing Putin to lead them “around the arena by the nose.” On the title page, an oversized telephone receiver was featured, designed to show that Berlin’s policy was restricted to diplomatic efforts.

The West could no longer allow Putin “to make a fool of them,” TAZ insisted.

Donath explicitly justified collaborating with fascists. “No one disputes that there are influential, radical right-wing forces,” he wrote. “But are there not several groups in the Ukraine as in other European democracies?”

...

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/07/germ-m07.html



Rant off/

Our cold war warriors are off their rocker

At a debate at the conservative Heritage Foundation, a panel of diplomats and commentators dismissed the Obama administration’s previous diplomatic attempt at a “Russian reset”.

“The current crisis is not an aberration, it is the culmination of many years” of Russian policy, said Stephen Blank, a senior fellow with the American Foreign Policy Council.

Luke Coffey, a fellow at Heritage, said that before any American military intervention, “Ukrainians are going to have to show us that they think Crimea is worth dying for.”

Blank proposed long-term actions, suggesting the installation of a permanent Nato fleet in the Black Sea, and American missile defences in the Baltic states.

“If Russia tears up arms treaty, I’d say: ‘Be my guest. We’re prepared to spend you into the ground,’” Blank said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/12/us-aid-ukraine-limbo-congress-imf-reforms



"We’re prepared to spend you into the ground"? Oh yeah? With what money? Whose money? That's right, I forgot, with that $20 Trillion worth of debt you stopped counting a long time ago.

Say, how are those Detroit pensions coming along?

The Ukraine Crisis Is Bolstering America's Oil And Gas Boom

The Ukraine Crisis Is Bolstering America's Oil And Gas Boom

The hand-wringing over what to do to help Ukraine has had a very positive impact on the U.S. oil and gas industry. Politicians like Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) are seizing on the crisis to call for a lifting of the ban on U.S. oil exports — the better to counterbalance Russia’s petro-influence. While the Wall Street Journal this morning wrote that western politicians are working on a variety of options to help “loosen Russia’s energy stranglehold on Ukraine” including “larger exports of U.S.-made natural gas.”

...

Yardeni noted this New York Times editorial over the weekend as proof positive that the Obama administration (and the rest of the left-leaning side of the political class) now embraces U.S. energy exports as a potentially powerful political tool. When even the New York Times editorial board defies the anti-fracking lobby to conclude that “natural gas exports could serve American foreign-policy interests in Europe” it indicates that LNG exports are something we can all agree on.

And get this, another Times story reveals that Hillary Rodham Clinton has for years been in favor of “channeling the domestic energy boom into a geopolitical tool to advance American interests around the world.” The former Secretary of State supposedly set up an 85-person bureau at the State Department in 2011, for the purpose of doing just that.

Naturally we haven’t heard about it until now. Because if Clinton were to voice support for using America’s energy riches as a geopolitical policy tool, that would be tantamount to stamping her seal of approval on fracking. We all know how much Hillary’s base on the left disapproves of fracking, but the simple truth is: there can be no natural gas boom without it.

...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/03/10/the-ukraine-crisis-is-bolstering-americas-oil-and-gas-boom/

I'd be laughing if this wasn't so serious.

From the Times article about the 85 person team Hillary Clinton set up to channel "the domestic energy boom into a geopolitical tool to advance American interests around the world.”


At the helm of the new energy diplomacy effort is Carlos Pascual, a former American ambassador to Ukraine, who leads the State Department’s Bureau of Energy Resources. The 85-person bureau was created in late 2011 by Hillary Rodham Clinton, the secretary of state at the time, for the purpose of channeling the domestic energy boom into a geopolitical tool to advance American interests around the world.

In an interview, Mr. Pascual asserted that his team’s efforts had already weakened Mr. Putin’s hand, and had helped lower Ukraine’s dependence on Russia for natural gas supplies to 60 percent, down from 90 percent.

Mr. Pascual said that his team had worked to help Ukraine and other European countries break away from dependence on Russian gas by finding supplies elsewhere, including Africa, and assisting the Europeans to build up their natural gas storage. The team, he said, is working with Ukraine and the European Union on completing a European energy charter, which already allows natural gas to move more quickly through Europe and permits countries to negotiate lower rates with Gazprom.

In addition, he said, the team is helping countries develop their own natural gas resources, including in partnership with American energy giants. Halliburton has started fracking for natural gas in Poland, while Shell last year signed a contract to explore for natural gas in Ukraine.



Well, that certainly explains Hillary's very strange appointment of Victoria *Fuck-the-EU* Nuland, wife of PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan and current Assistant Secretary of State who was passing out donuts to the Maiden rioters in Kiev.

Hat tip to DUer KoKo.

Thursday, 19 May 2011
The strange appointment of Victoria Nuland as State Department Spokesperson
By Patricia H. Kushlis

Is Hillary asleep at the switch? What is going on here?

Earlier this week, Josh Rogin at FP and Eric Martin at Progressive Realist both flagged the curious appointment of Victoria Nuland as the next State Department Spokesperson to fill P.J. Crowley’s shoes.
Martin questions whether this has foreign policy implications, in particular the replacement of an anti-torture appointee with someone who served as Principal Deputy National Security Advisor to Vice President Cheney.

Rogin doesn’t directly raise potential administration policy shifts but does point out that once upon a time Nuland was Strobe Talbott’s Chief of Staff when he was Deputy Secretary of State during the Clinton Administration and that Talbott had thought very highly of her at the time and still does. In fact, he, according to Rogin, praised her to the hilt in an interview about the pending appointment. So the seemingly amoral Nuland, we’re led to believe, can and will do anyone’s bidding and do it well – in short, a consummate career diplomat.

Why?

But why would Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration agree to appoint to this politically sensitive position someone who willingly served such a controversial figure in suppporting and implementing the “war on terror” and all the baggage that comes with it? Furthermore, how reliable is a Talbott reference anyway? After all, I understand that he just helped his friend Robert Kagan, Nuland’s neocon husband, get a job at Brookings and Talbott is also a friend of neocon writer Marc Gerecht, the husband of Diane Zeleny who also just latched onto a likely sweetheart deal sort of appointment as Head of External Relations and Congressional Affairs at the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). Whether Zeleny deserves or is qualified for the position or not.

From what I know about the Department, an FSO doesn’t just get detailed to the staff of a highly charged and ideological Vice President unless that detailee agrees to follow the boss’s dictates. Cheney’s were all too often forceful and odious. Furthermore, does anyone really think that Cheney –with his penchant for super loyalty and secrecy - would have ever accepted Nuland (or anyone else) for the position without some kind of loyalty test?
Surely the State Department under Hillary Clinton could have found equally (or likely even better) qualified career candidates who do not carry Nuland’s political baggage.

Behind the scenes trade off?
......Continued at the Link.....

http://whirledview.typepad.com/whirledview/2011/05/the-strange-appointment-of-victoria-nuland-as-states-spokesperson.html

Taken from http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024461021#post2


FRACK BABY FRACK!

Robert Parry: Reagan-Style Hypocrisy and the Ukraine Crisis

Reagan-Style Hypocrisy and the Ukraine Crisis

The mainstream U.S. news media has so fully bought into the U.S. government’s narrative on Ukraine that almost no one sees the layers of hypocrisy, an achievement in “group think” that dates back to Ronald Reagan’s war against “moral equivalence”

by Robert Parry

Official Washington’s hearty disdain for anyone who cites U.S. hypocrisy toward the Ukraine crisis can be traced back to a propaganda strategy hatched by the Reagan administration in 1984, dismissing any comparisons between U.S. and Soviet behavior as unacceptable expressions of “moral equivalence.”

...

This framing proved effective in tarring U.S. journalists and human rights activists as, in essence, Soviet apologists. The “theme” was most famously expressed by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick at the Republican National Convention in 1984 when she decried anyone who would “blame America first.”

...

Over the past three decades, the argument against “moral equivalence” has changed little, though it has morphed into what is now more commonly described as American “exceptionalism,” the new trump card against anyone who suggests that the U.S. government should abide by international law and be held to common human rights standards.

...

Suddenly, we see mainstream American journalists searching for some clause in Ukraine’s constitution that prohibits secession, though these journalists had no problem with the violation of the same constitution’s procedures for impeaching a president, rules ignored by the coup regime with barely a peep from U.S. news outlets.

....

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/03/12-2


Referenced in this article is Parry's excellent "Neocons and the Ukraine Coup" posted below

It's all interlinked.

Weaken Russia's naval forces so you can weaken Syria and have neither of them stand in the way of getting to the grand prize of them all "Iran".

There's so much going on they're not even trying very hard to sense because whatever the propaganda organs, like the NYT, put out, it becomes "fact" the next day. Like that ridiculous story about Merkel saying Putin was unhinged.

Such liars. Such charlatans.

...

As for the German chancellory, it's not exactly endorsing the Times's account. Die Welt, the German newspaper, reported that "The chancellery was not pleased with the reporting on the conversation. They claim that what the chancellor said was that Putin has a different perception on Crimea, which is why she is pushing for a fact finding mission on the matter."

Government spokesman Jens Alberts told Claudia Himmelreich, a McClatchy special correspondent, exactly what the government said on Monday: no comment on the contents of the chancellor's confidential phone conversations -- with either Putin or Obama. In defining the German view, Alberts said he would "not dwell on reports and rumors of someone claiming she possibly said this or that. However, what is undisputed is that President Putin has a completely different view of the situation and the events on Crimea than the German government and our western allies."

A different view. Obviously. But unhinged?

So if Merkel didn't portray Putin as unhinged, why would the unknown Obama aide tell the New York Times she did? Because in the world of propaganda, successfully portraying your adversary as being crazy, without any rational backing to his actions, makes it unnecessary to try to understand the complexities or sensitivities of the issues. If Putin is crazy, then that's enough. We needn't think any further about what he has to say. And if the New York Times says he's crazy, that's good enough for the dozens of reporters who've come along since, repeating the comment to their millions of viewers and readers as if it was a confirmed statement.

...

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/03/05/3975981/did-angela-merkel-really-say-putin.html


and not just dozens of reporters either, thousands of propagandists followed suite. Why even at DU, the next day the entire anti-Snowden, anti-Russia crowd adopted that meme and the word *unhinged*.

We are being fucking had. McCain is popping up everywhere cheering "rebels" on, going from one place to the next after leaving the first ones in total ruin and chaos. Bush's PNAC crew is very busy at work driving a wedge through Obama and Putin every chance they get, and deliberately sabotaging talks because they find it "tragic" we're not at war yet. They sure were pissed when Obama and Putin snuck in a short, private face to face at the G20 and de-escalated Syria in September. That wasn't meant to happen and they'll make sure it never happens again. Ramp it up everywhere! Venezuela, Syria, Ukraine, oil for everyone!

Why am I ranting to you? So sorry. I know we're on the same side and you see things very clearly.

Fascists, the same everywhere.

You're welcome. Thanks for all the information you've
The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those....The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.

If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort. They are doing this even in those cases where they hope to have profitable connections with German chemical firms after the war ends. They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead.

...
Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion. American fascists of this stamp were clandestinely aligned with their German counterparts before the war, and are even now preparing to resume where they left off, after "the present unpleasantness" ceases.

...

The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They use isolationism as a slogan to conceal their own selfish imperialism. They cultivate hate and distrust of both Britain and Russia. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.

-- Henry A. Wallace, Franklin D. Roosevelt's 2nd Vice President (1941-1945), run out by the corporate warloving wing of the Democratic Party so they could impose Truman on FDR.

http://newdeal.feri.org/wallace/haw23.htm

Protesters clash with police across Turkey as thousands mourn 15yo teen death

Protesters clash with police across Turkey as thousands mourn 15yo teen death


Anti-government protesters clash with riot police during a demonstration in Istanbul March 11, 2014. (Reuters)

Police and protesters have clashed in several cities in Turkey as the country is gripped by unrest following the death of 15-year old Berkin Elvan. He was hit by tear-gas canister shot by police and died in hospital after 269 days in a coma.

Thousands of people took to the streets of Turkey’s biggest cities in Ankara and Istanbul after the family of Berkin Elvan confirmed his death and made the announcement on Twitter.

...


Anti-government protesters run as riot police fires a water cannon during a demonstration in Ankara March 11, 2014. (Reuters)

Upon learning about his death about 1,000 people staged a rally outside the Istanbul hospital where the teen was treated.

Outside the hospital security forces tried to disperse the crowd as some of the mourners attacked police cars with stone and sticks while forming barricades with rubbish containers, Anadolu Agency reported.


Anti-government protesters run as riot police fires tear gas during a demonstration in Ankara March 11, 2014. (Reuters)

...


Hurriyet Daily News
@HDNER

#HumanRightsWatch: #BerkinElvan's family deserve justice http://bit.ly/1cRgVJs
10:04 AM - 11 Mar 2014

Mahir Zeynalov
@MahirZeynalov

I counted demonrastrations in at least 19 Turkish cities and provinces so far today. The most violent one is in Ankara.
11:31 AM - 11 Mar 2014


...

http://rt.com/news/turkey-clashes-teenager-death-190/

Merkel never said Putin is unhinged. Germany was not pleased with that BS. A "memo" like you said

Great post and insight by the way.

...

As for the German chancellory, it's not exactly endorsing the Times's account. Die Welt, the German newspaper, reported that "The chancellery was not pleased with the reporting on the conversation. They claim that what the chancellor said was that Putin has a different perception on Crimea, which is why she is pushing for a fact finding mission on the matter."

Government spokesman Jens Alberts told Claudia Himmelreich, a McClatchy special correspondent, exactly what the government said on Monday: no comment on the contents of the chancellor's confidential phone conversations -- with either Putin or Obama. In defining the German view, Alberts said he would "not dwell on reports and rumors of someone claiming she possibly said this or that. However, what is undisputed is that President Putin has a completely different view of the situation and the events on Crimea than the German government and our western allies."

A different view. Obviously. But unhinged?

So if Merkel didn't portray Putin as unhinged, why would the unknown Obama aide tell the New York Times she did? Because in the world of propaganda, successfully portraying your adversary as being crazy, without any rational backing to his actions, makes it unnecessary to try to understand the complexities or sensitivities of the issues. If Putin is crazy, then that's enough. We needn't think any further about what he has to say. And if the New York Times says he's crazy, that's good enough for the dozens of reporters who've come along since, repeating the comment to their millions of viewers and readers as if it was a confirmed statement.

...

http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/03/05/3975981/did-angela-merkel-really-say-putin.html


and not just dozens of reporters either, thousands of propagandists followed suite.

Ukraine Crisis Spurs Fracking-Friendly Measure in Poland

Ukraine Crisis Spurs Fracking-Friendly Measure in Poland

Poland's Prime Minister Tusk says fracking will be tax-free until 2020
- Andrea Germanos, staff writer


A crowd welcomes a screening of the documentary "Drill Baby Drill" in Warsaw. (Photo: greensefa/cc/flickr)

As the crisis in Ukraine continues to put a spotlight on Russia's stranglehold over European gas supplies, Poland has offered a frack-friendly proposal of making shale gas extraction tax-ree in the country.

"We adopted measures that should encourage shale gas exploration," Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Tuesday.

According to the new measures, fracking will be tax-free until 2020, and after that point taxes "shouldn't exceed 40 percent of extraction income," Tusk said.

The first commercial shale well in the country is expected this year, and as many as 30 fracking wells could be drilled this year.

Poland's burgeoning "dash for gas" has also brought environmental and public health concerns, and led a group of protesters to blockade a Chevron fracking site last year.

On Monday, Tusk warned of the consequences of European countries' reliance on Russian gas, saying, "We will not be able to efficiently fend off potential aggressive steps by Russia in the future, if so many European countries are dependent on Russian gas deliveries or wade into such dependence."

Chancellor Angela Merkel is set to make a visit to Poland on Wednesday to discuss the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.

"Increasingly more expensive energy in Europe due to exorbitant climate and environmental ambitions may also mean greater dependence in Russian energy sources...Hence, I will talk (to Merkel) primarily about how Germany is able to correct some economic actions so that dependence on Russian gas doesn't paralyze Europe when it needs...a decisive stance," Reuters reports Tusk as saying.

________________
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/03/11-6


Frack baby, frack!



Our Assistant Secretary of State looked so cute between that Chevron and Exxon Mobile logos when she admitted we poured over $5 billion into Ukraine for the mess we're seeing today.



Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.

--Victoria Nuland, US Assistant Secretary of State and wife of PNAC co-founder Robert Kagan, at the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference event sponsored by the corporations above to discuss how the goal of "democracy" in Ukraine was almost reached and how "The Euro-Maidan movement has come to embody the principles and values that are the cornerstones for all free democracies." Dec 13, 2013

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ... 134 Next »