"NYT Is Lost in Its Ukraine Propaganda"--Another View
January 24, 2015
Exclusive: One danger of lying is that you must then incorporate the falsehood into the longer narrative, somehow making the lies fit. The same is true of propaganda as the New York Times is learning as it continues to falsify the narrative of the Ukraine crisis, writes Robert Parry.
Possibly the worst purveyor of this Cold War-style propaganda has been the New York Times, which has given its readers a steady diet of biased reporting and analysis, including now accusing the Russians for a resurgence in the fighting.
One way the Times has falsified the Ukraine narrative is by dating the origins of the crisis to several months after the crisis actually began. So, the lead story in Saturdays editions ignored the actual chronology of events and started the clock with the appearance of Russian troops in Crimea in spring 2014.
The Times article by Rick Lyman and Andrew E. Kramer said: A shaky cease-fire has all but vanished, with rebel leaders vowing fresh attacks. Civilians are being hit by deadly mortars at bus stops. Tanks are rumbling down snowy roads in rebel-held areas with soldiers in unmarked green uniforms sitting on their turrets, waving at bystanders a disquieting echo of the little green men whose appearance in Crimea opened this stubborn conflict in the spring.
In other words, the story doesnt start in fall 2013 with the extraordinary U.S. intervention in Ukrainian political affairs spearheaded by American neocons, such as National Endowment for Democracy president Carl Gershman, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and Sen. John McCain nor with the U.S.-backed coup on Feb. 22, 2014, which ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych and put one of Nulands chosen leaders, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, in as Prime Minister.
More at:
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaganda/
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)I asked another guy and his answer was "Read those 31 pages of my journal, sheeple."
Just what kind of proof are you looking for? Numerous journalists, real journalists, journalists outside of the mainstream media, have been covering this story for months.
Are you waiting for the NY Times to cover it? The same NY Times that got the WMD story wrong? The babies thrown out of incubators story wrong? Yeah, maybe the Times will give you the proof you want, when it's too late to make a difference.
What is it you're looking for? A smoking gun? An admission of guilt? The CIA doesn't work that way, nor does the State Dept or DoD. Maybe you're not old enough to remember the Cold War. This is the Cold War on steroids.
I've read, in part or in whole, thousands of articles over the last year about the situation here in Ukraine. I understand that not everybody had the time to be able to do that. But can't you at least do something other than waiting for a conclusive summary to be handed to you on a silver platter?
Robert Parry (author of the above) is a highly respected journalist, yet you're looking for something more than that? What exactly?
=====
Robert Parry (born June 24, 1949) is an American investigative journalist best known for his role in covering the Iran-Contra affair for the Associated Press (AP) and Newsweek, including breaking the Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare (CIA manual provided to the Nicaraguan contras) and the CIA and Contras cocaine trafficking in the US scandal in 1985. He was awarded the George Polk Award for National Reporting in 1984. He has been the editor of Consortium News since 1995.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Parry_%28journalist%29
It is documented that Victoria Nuland and the State Department plotted AFTER Janukovicz was ousted, to get "proper" politicians in place.
I would like to see proof that a foreign entity was aiding/planning the coup BEFORE Janukovicz was ousted.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)The 5 billion is mentioned at the 7:40 mark, should you not want to listen to the whole thing. And if you think that money is about promoting democracy, ask people throughout the middle east how that worked out for them.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Consortium News
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)accusing the New York Times of the same sin.
Hilarious
In other words, the story doesnt start in fall 2013 with the extraordinary U.S. intervention in Ukrainian political affairs spearheaded by American neocons
Ah yes! All those neocons controlling the Obama administration. I forgot about those.
polly7
(20,582 posts)Nitram
(22,671 posts)Portraying a popular revolution as a "U.S.-backed coup" is quite a stretch. Not a word about the annexation of Ukrainian territory and the invasion of east Ukraine by Russian paramilitary troops, weapons and money. Quite a distorted picture you make!
MattSh
(3,714 posts)Geez, pull your head out of your TV.

newthinking
(3,982 posts)one that you would think would send off alarm bells on a liberal site.
A coallation of extremists, neo-nazi's, and RW fundamentalist religious leaders (Turchev is a fundamentalist baptist Pastor)
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Their fondness for defending exposed saiients to the death (of other people, of course) marks them for the fools they are, and also indicates that their "strategy" is to make the war bigger, not to try to win it on the ground. Correct as far as it goes, as they cannot win it on the ground, but incorrect insofar as it assumes anybody else is going to jump in and save their ass. When this mess is all over, Merkel will blame Poroshenko, Nuland will blame Yats for failing them. This is very much a "Let's you and him fight." kind of war.
Putin, on the other hand, just keeps nibbling away.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)They studied the claims and generally agree that the narrative is not accurate and information is not misrepresented and supressed.
US Media Hypocrisy in Covering Ukraine Crisis
http://www.projectcensored.org/9-us-media-hypocrisy-covering-ukraine-crisis/
October 1, 2014
Russias occupation of Crimea has caused US corporate media and government officials to call for a stern US response. Secretary of State John Kerry declaimed the Russian intervention as a nineteenth-century act in the twenty-first century. What Russias US critics seem to forget, Robert Parry reported, is the United States own history of overthrowing democratic governments, including the illegal invasion of Iraq, which Kerry supported.
Corporate media also fail to acknowledge that Putin ordered the occupation of Kiev after a coup led at least partly by neo-Nazisconditions arguably less criminal than the US invasion of Iraq, which the US legitimized with false claims. If Putin is violating international law by sending Russian troops into the Crimea after a violent coup spearheaded by neo-Nazi militias ousted Ukraines democratically elected president, wrote Parry, then why hasnt the US government turned over George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and indeed John Kerry to the International Criminal Court for their far more criminal invasion of Iraq? (In a similar vein, Noam Chomsky has written about the US occupation of Guantánamo in Cuba as another instance of the contradiction between the US position toward Russia and its own lack of respect for national sovereignty.)
Further, Ukraines democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, fled Kiev for his life after the coup and sought Russias help quelling the neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine, citing their oppression of the countrys native Russian population. It was only after this that Putin requested the Russian parliaments permission to deploy Russian troops in to stop the expansion of neo-Nazi control to areas that have deep historical ties to Russia.
Nevertheless, while downplaying these details, US corporate media accuse Russia of violating international law. The overriding hypocrisy of the Washington Post, Secretary Kerry and indeed nearly all of Official Washington, is their insistence that the United States actually promotes the principle of democracy or, for that matter, the rule of international law, wrote Parry. Those are at best situational ethics when it comes to advancing US interests around the world. In a subsequent report, Parry wrote that, despite evidence to the contrary, US policy makers and corporate media have intentionally neglected to report that neo-Nazi militias played a central role in the February 22, 2014, overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych. Parry reported, The US medias take on the Ukraine crisis is that a democratic revolution ousted President Viktor Yanukovych, followed by a legitimate change of government. So, to mention the key role played by neo-Nazi militias in the putsch or to note that Yanukovych was democratically electedand then illegally deposedgets you dismissed as a Russian propagandist.
http://www.projectcensored.org/9-us-media-hypocrisy-covering-ukraine-crisis/
newthinking
(3,982 posts)WHAT IS MODERN CENSORSHIP?
At Project Censored, we examine the coverage of news and information important to the maintenance of a healthy and functioning democracy. We define Modern Censorship as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story or piece of a news story based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions).