What Is Real Or Fake?
A dear friend and myself have quite differing views on Putin and Russia and recently he introduced me to an article by Con Coughlin of the "Daily Telegraph". It featured the recent protests against The Government and their President, Putin. Here is an extract from the piece as a way of illustrating the tone.
"At home, this has resulted in accusations that the Kremlin orchestrated the murders of high profile political opponents such as Boris Nemtsov, who was shot dead on a bridge close to the Kremlin two years ago, after claiming Mr Putin and his associates were corrupt. Opposition political parties have been crushed, as have newspapers, television stations and any other media outlets that have dared to question the Russian leader’s judgement.
It is a similar picture outside Russia, where Moscow has acted forcefully against its neighbouring states Georgia and Ukraine, which had the temerity to protest against Russian interference in their affairs. This has led to significant portions of territory in Georgia and Eastern Ukraine now finding themselves under Russian control."
Ever since 9/11 I have taken a deep interest in Russia's and Putin's place in the "global politic" and in particular the indifference and indeed aggressive stance of Obama's regime coupled with that of The EUSSR. The picture above, speaks volumes.
Firstly consider how the awful mutation of American influence in the Middle East has unfolded. How Bliar and Camoron were used to pour petrol on the fires in Iraq and Libya. Then the EUSSR, under Merkel's express wishes, joined, with some alacrity, into rushing to impose sanctions on Russia over Ukraine, caused me to slowly begin to question The West's motives and behaviour in global ambition.
Many better qualified and intellectually superior to myself have also been puzzled as to the motives of Western and particularly American behaviour. The unqualified support of Saudi Arabia, the arming of rebel factions in Syria and the obsessive foolishness in demanding regime change whenever an incumbent doesn't suit. Assad, Gaddafi and indeed Ukraine. From the Guardian and a significant balanced presentation to counter Coughlin, I beg consideration of this article.
I also suggest that the arguments presented by Milne are better researched and presented than Coughlin's. Whatever one's own views I still feel the presentation of an argument is always better when written well and unemotionally. Much of Coughlin's rhetoric is presented as fact and unarguable. Which is just not the case.
Consider the antipathy that began with Obama and then think of the unedifying spat over whether Russia and Putin sought to influence the American presidential battle. The dreadful Comey performance before the Senate Committee and his obvious allegiance to the last Administration Even when he got things wrong!. Not least the likely cover up of their wire-tapping of Trump's people!
This hacking stuff is done by every major power. Indeed Obama was shown to have hacked his allies every bit as any perceived enemies. Remember this debacle? So what do all these claims, counterclaims and constant media use of "fake news" to gull the gullible mean for us all?
The modern phenomena of social media has given voice to arguments and debate never before possible. Since there are so many ways people can seek information for themselves and not rely on a propaganda outpouring by tame press and TV "news" presentations, has left the media with a headache. They are no longer trusted and often with good reason.
The bile regurgitated over Trump's victory and the Brexit vote have given us glaring examples of how the times are changing. The "old pals" acts are no longer as credible or unquestionable as they once were. Such as reported about Coughlin. Now the one danger with this present state of global communication is the matter of what's real and what's fake.
In many, many instances such is the volume of claim and counterclaim, true or false, genuine fact or unfettered propaganda, we can only determine as much as possible for ourselves if we have the time. However we should never forget one major issue in human affairs. Greed. How many of us offered a place at a top table are prepared to turn it down for the sake of integrity?
One final thought in all this. Which is always a preferable way of settling disagreements? Through violent insurrection and sabre rattling, such as we are seeing aimed, via Poland, at Russia or sensible, grown up diplomacy. In depth study of what has happened over Ukraine and in Syria tells us much.
None of it favourable to Western efforts to demand we regard only our leaders as having any credible morality. Not just history but the present day tells us that if Putin is so dreadful and Russia our for ever enemy, he/they are no better or worse than Obama, Clinton, Cameron and certainly Merkel. The terrible goings on in Mosul, as shown by the West's hacks in the media, lauded as a stand against ISIL whereas an identical and probably more humanitarian taking of Aleppo was nought but total, inhumane slaughter by Assad and Putin. Heh?
As for the protests in Russia that Coughlin writes of, note the paucity of media attention to the terrible violence in Paris. Think to of the burning of the Berkeley campus and the fascist like petulance after Trump's win. No George Soros was thrilled! Warning, foul language and true or false issues!!
I close with yet another probable terrorist murder and atrocity. This time in St. Petersburg. Of all the things we can argue about, a rapprochement with Russia and Putin would go far to tackle this Islamic war on innocents. So far we have just made it all so much easier for the barbaric fanatics.