Ukraine Protests and the US Role
All day, yesterday, US TV networks were showing interviews with Ukraine protesters who were calling the government that people voted for and elected a “dictatorship” and President Viktor Yanukovych a “dictator” and that “now we’re free”. I won’t go into all the past public protests in a variety of countries whose government was acceptable to US corporate owned media, where they never interviewed or broadcast repeatedly that an elected government was a “dictatorship”. Even if they would, they’d make sure to say “this is a small group of people” or that “they don’t represent the views of the majority”, and that the government was elected into office. There are people right here in the US, too, who say President Obama is a “dictator”. Heck, some even say he’s not a legitimate president because, they claim, he wasn’t born in the US. Should foreign reporters tell their audiences that he’s a “dictator” because some say he is? But, even if they did, it wouldn’t have the same effect as it does here because, by all accounts and indications, the American people are much more influenced and their opinions are formed by corporate TV than most of the rest of the world, given the significant place TV occupies in their lives. So, when CNN or ABC or NBC or MSNBC “reports” its lies, those lies aren’t innocent and innocuous. They have political significance. There’s reason why lying to Congress, or in courts, or for that matter, to any government oversight, regulatory or law enforcement agency is considered a crime. That’s because lies have consequences.
They also have been presenting President Putin as a dictator. He may well have dictatorial tendencies, but, such general and sweeping comments in the media give the impression, purposely I believe, that he calls all the shots, himself, and make us forget that they too have a parliament. Now, let’s face it: realistically, how bad of a dictator can Putin be? He might have a “kill list” and the authority to call for anyone’s assassination? Would he decide on his own, without the parliament’s authority, to invade a country? Does he have the authority to detain his citizens, indefinitely, without any charges or trial or legal representation? Can he order a house in another country be bombed without knowing who’s in it and without knowing for certain that there may be a wedding taking place with lots of guests? Well, if all that is true, which I seriously doubt, then he’s only as much of a dictator as Obama. The media makes a huge deal about Putin’s shirtless horseback riding, or brown water coming out of water faucets in a Sochi hotel. If you want to see brown water, go to West Virginia, where the tap water is still “brown” for some 300,000 residents. Or, consider the stupid law they passed in Russia, recently, that criminalizes “homosexual propaganda to children”. But, the Arizona legislature also recently passed a law which allows businesses to refuse service to homosexuals, not to mention US close ally and friend, Saudi Arabia, and many other nations with even worse gay policies. The point is the focus that the media, in collusion with the Pentagon, chooses to put on this or that leader or country, at any given time, such as Saddam’s sword, which they used to show over and over again and again because the Pentagon was planning an invasion and wanted us to go along with it.
These things don’t happen by coincidence. The focus they place on any given leader is for a reason. And, there is no reason to believe Ukraine was an exception. In the leaked phone conversation, in which Victoria Nuland, Assistant U.S. Secretary of State, said “fuck the EU”, for which she later apologized, she was discussing the future of Ukraine with U.S. Ambassador to the country. Besides, the CIA is not sent there for vacationing. They have a job to do and are in close and constant contact with the US embassy and the State Department. Generally, CIA agents, who are spies and have nothing to do with diplomacy, are sent as “embassy staff”, which by the way is against rules of international diplomacy or laws. When a CIA agent shot and killed two Pakistani citizens, a few years ago, the US State Department claimed diplomatic immunity for him and flew him home to avoid his prosecution. Back in 1979, when revolution broke out in Iran (now, that’s a revolution, if you want to know what one looks like, not some armed men fighting the police in the capital around government buildings), and protesters were about to enter the US embassy, the first thing the embassy staff did was shred their documents that would show not an institution for diplomacy and aiding its own citizens when they needed help, but, a military style spy agency with connections to local military brass and conspiracies for assassinations, bribery, threats and disinformation (the CIA jargon for lies), etc.
The point is: the State Department works closely with the CIA and they’re not there just for diplomacy. They take an active role in deciding the future of the nation for the benefit of US multinational corporations. Now, add to this mix, the Pentagon and the US corporate media that works closely with them and suddenly, a clear, but ugly and frightening picture begins to appear.