Reuters Propaganda on Poroshenko Swearing-In

In “Poroshenko promises united Ukraine and no compromise on Crimea” by the appropriately named Dick Balmforth,

Reuters faithfully follows the Western (specifically the US) Government party line in re-inforcing various terminology in the readers mind. Propaganda 101 is that if you repeat a lie loudly no matter how ludicrous and contrary to scientific evidence, it becomes Fact.

So we have the following salvo to begin the third para

Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula in March, weeks after street protests ousted Poroshenko’s pro-Moscow predecessor

This one para has now become established Fact. I could argue with facts and evidence (and indeed Western media reports from that time) that this para should read

Following the nationalistic led violent coup that forced Poroshenko’s predecessor to flee, Crimeans voted first to secede and then to re-unify with Russia

Every bit of that para is Factual and defensible with evidence. But of course the above para would be denounced as “Russian propaganda”. Why? Who makes that judgment? The Western Corporate Media?

Dick goes on:

“This idea [of Ukraine joining the EU] is anathema to Moscow, which wants to keep Ukraine in its own post-Soviet sphere of influence.”

So this is Dick’s opinion. (Actually not his opinion. Something that’s handed to him as part of Victoria Nuland’s talking points. Doing actual, you know, research is not a reporter’s job).

In reality, Russia has on multiple occasions ranging back to last year before the coup, said that if Ukraine signed a free trade agreement with the EU, its free trade agreements with Russia would be jeopardized with harm to both the Ukranian and Russian economies. Russia proposed holding tripartite talks with the EU and Ukraine but were rebuffed.

Putin in a recent speech to the global CEOs and leaders in the St Petersburg Economic Summit said as much in response to a question.

Here′s what happened. I’ll break it down for you briefly.

Ukraine was supposed to sign an association agreement with the EU. Using absolutely modern diplomatic tools, we proved that the proposed document is at least inconsistent with Russian interests since the Russian and the Ukrainian economies are closely intertwined. We have 245 Ukrainian enterprises working for us in the defence industry alone.

Imagine that we stop taking products from them tomorrow. What will happen to their enterprises? Most of them will just stop working. You can′t buy Mi-8 engines in the West. They just don′t make them there. Or, similarly, you won′t be buying engines for vessels, as they are not used in the Western industry. On top of this, it′s next to impossible to make it into the Western market. You know it and I know it. There are many other elements, so I won′t take your time listing them. We used our numbers to prove that this document will cause a lot of damage. We proposed – I want to emphasise this and I want you to hear me – holding a discussion with us on these issues and trying to find solutions in an absolutely civil manner.

What did we get in response?

They told us to mind our own business. Excuse me, I don′t want to hurt anyone′s feelings, but it′s been a while since I heard anything that snobbish. They just slammed the door in our face telling us to mind our own business.

Well, then, if it is none of our business, we tried to convince our Ukrainian partners to take a look at the possible outcome. President Yanukovych decided to postpone the signing and hold additional talks. What came next? A coup d’état. No matter what you choose to call it, a revolution or something else. It’s a coup d’état with the use of violence and militant forces. Who′s on whose side now? Who is using which tools from the past or the future?

It′s imperative to be very careful with regard to public institutions of emerging nations because if you are not things may slide into chaos, which is exactly what happened in Ukraine. The civil war and chaos are there already. Who benefits from it? Why would they do it, if Yanukovych agreed to everything? They had to go to the voting stations instead, and the same people would be in power now, only legally. We, like idiots, would be paying them the $15 billion that we promised, keeping gas prices low for them and continuing to subsidise their economy…

Let’s face it. We are all adults here, right? Intelligent and educated people. The West supported the unconstitutional coup d’état. It did in fact, didn′t it? Not only by way of the infamous cakes, but through informational and political support and what not. Why did it do so?

All right. And now you think that it′s all our fault? We proposed a dialogue and were denied it. What’s next? The last time I was in Brussels we agreed to keep this dialogue alive. That was before the coup. Mr Ulyukayev (he is sitting there across from me), a man of respect, speaks decent English, has absolutely market-driven brains, one of our top specialists in the economy, went for consultations. Ask him about it after the session is over. I won′t dwell on it now. But there were no consultations. Nothing but slogans.

What’s next? They made a ​​coup and don′t want to speak with us. What are we supposed to think? The next step will take Ukraine into NATO. They never ask us about our opinion, and we have found out over the past two decades that there′s never any dialogue on this issue. All that they ever tell us is, ″It′s none of your business, none of your concern.″ We tell them, ″A military infrastructure is approaching our borders.″ ″Don′t worry, it’s not aimed against you.″ So, tomorrow Ukraine may end up being a NATO member, and the next thing you know, it will have a US missile defence complex stationed on its territory. No one ever talks to us on this subject, either. They just tell us, ″It′s not against you, and it′s none of your concern.″ You see, we are tired of this kind of discussions where nothing gets discussed. We start having concerns regarding economic and security issues. What are we supposed to do in this situation?

The people in southeastern Ukraine, including Crimea, were scared by such developments, and Crimean residents expressed the desire to hold a referendum on possible accession to Russia. What have we done in this situation? We have just secured their freedom of expression. And I′m here to guarantee you (this time, I believe, you will agree with me, and the vast majority of the people in this auditorium will agree as well, and people all over the world understand what it′s all about, there are no fools, actually) that if we did not do what we did in Crimea, Crimea would have it much worse than Odessa where people were burned alive. And there are no explanations, no real condemnations by anyone. It′s still not even clear who did it, I mean the tragedy in Odessa. Now you tell me: who is acting in the old way, and who is acting based on current realities?

Even if one does not believe Putin, look at the various reports from that time where Russia repeatedly asked for holding talks with the EU.

Yet for Dick, apparently anything that happened in the past is History and EVERYBODY knows History is b-ooo-ring!

The academically challenged Dick goes on with the rest of his piece ensuring that the term “pro-Russian separatist” is used at least 4-5 times (following techniques refined since the time of Goebbels) whereas the term “anti-Kiev federalist or separatist” is the reality. While Lugansk and Donetsk have held peaceful referendums, the overwhelming call was for independence from the US Government controlled Kievian authorities.

Dick also calls out a comment on Russian propaganda through a para without quotes:

Switching to Russian from Ukrainian to address the people of the troubled east, he said they had been duped by myths about the Kiev leadership which had been stoked by Russian propaganda.

Dick and his ilk, faced with an alternate, rationality based assessment of what happened, hunker down and call it all propaganda. After all, everybody knows that the Western Corporate media reporters are “unbiased” and represents the highest form of Truth.

The whole tone of the article is hagiographical and short of exhorting the reader to fall on their knees and sing hallelujah to Poroshenko and pray for this deliverance from Evil aka Putin.

While Dick’s paean to Poroshenko gets republished all over the World, a growing number of readers who are not as brain-dead as Reuters and other Corporate Media outlets assume them to be are looking for alternatives to the bland sameness of Western Corporate pronouncements.

They are turning to more and more to alternative news media from Counterpunch, or even which the Corporate Western media has grown to hate since they present news in exacting detail with video evidence directly contradicting the official party line.

A great analysis of the how the Western media corporate structure reinforces those who spread Western Government propaganda and punishing those who go against the grain, can be found here.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Reuters Propaganda on Poroshenko Swearing-In

  1. Pingback: The Curious Background of Reuter’s Richard Balmforth | ludwitt

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s