Many articles I have published in this blog recently look less and less like information warfare but illustrate the effects of information warfare.

Here Putin is being painted into a corner and the results are less and less trust in both the Russian government and Putin himself.

Russia cannot respond adequately to charges of massive corruption by Putin himself and with the government as a whole.  The charges are from official government sources, studies and court cases and this is a tactic not used in the past 24 months since Russia first went completely rogue.

Notice the half-hearted defense of Putin by Lavrov in his phone call to Secretary Kerry.  I can hear it now..  “Uh huh.  Uh huh.  There, there, Sergei.  We’re not backing down from the statement. No, Sergei, you can hold your breath until you turn blue, it won’t matter. Yes, I’d love if you bring this up to the UN Security Council. Uh, huh.  Okay, buh bye. Click.”  *giggle*  *Piss off, Sergei*

Is this enough for the Russian people to launch a colored revolution and through Putin into a snow drift?  No.  But this does put, perhaps, the first nail in his figurative coffin.  In MMA terms, this strike hurt.

I especially love the analogy in the very last line.

</end editorial>

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 13 Issue: 21

February 1, 2016 04:15 PM Age: 8 hrs

By: Pavel K. Baev

Last week’s (January 26) reporting in the Western media that the United States government was linking Russian President Vladimir Putin to corruption has rocked Russian domestic politics. Specifically, a recent BBC documentary carried remarks to this effect by Acting US Treasury Department Under Secretary Adam J. Szubin, who heads the Office of Intelligence and Analysis (Slon.ru, January 26). The real shock came, however, when the White House rather matter-of-factly confirmed Szubin’s stated opinion that the Russian president was personally involved in shady deals (Kommersant, January 29). Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov called these allegations “unacceptable” as well as “outrageous and insulting” (RIA Novosti, January 29). While Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in a telephone conversation with US State Secretary John Kerry, described the accusations as “fanciful and rude” and complained about a “deliberate escalation of tensions” coming from Washington (Newsru.com, January 29). The resonance of this scandal is bolstered by the fact that it exploded only a week after British judge Sir Robert M. Owen announced the conclusion of the United Kingdom’s investigation into the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, which established that Putin himself had “probably” ordered it (Ezhednevny Zhurnal, January 22).

Strictly speaking, there is nothing new in the statement that Putin is presiding over a system of state-organized corruption, or in the assumption that the chain of command in dirty special operations leads directly to him. Alexei Navalny, the fearless Russian anti-corruption campaigner, argues that the enforcement of sanctions against such Kremlin-friendly oligarchs as Gennady Timchenko and brothers Arkady and Boris Rotenberg means that the US authorities are perfectly aware of the inner workings of the Russian system of corruption and of Putin’s role in it (Moscow Echo, January 29). The Russian elites’ predatory appetites have not diminished at all, despite the sorry state of the country’s economy. And the key issue for serious conversations among insiders is presently the distribution of money, which the government will have to produce to rescue the “starving” state corporations and banks (Politcom.ru, January 29). The latest “Corruption Perception Index” released by Transparency International, last week, awarded Russia 119^th place out of 168 (together with Azerbaijan and Sierra-Leone), noting that embezzlement in Russia has now converged with government repression (Novaya Gazeta, January 28).

Concern over negative repercussions helps explain Russians’ reluctance to protest wide-scale systemic corruption in their country. But as the economic crisis eats deeper into their incomes, the Russian population’s irritation will likely continue to grow and could even acquire a political character (Slon.ru, January 29). Indeed, this winter, the series of protests by Russian truck drivers against new taxes had conspicuously challenged Russians’ habit of passively accepting legitimized injustice; and new protest actions are planned for the coming weeks (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, January 28). Meanwhile, worries about fast-growing flu outbreaks in Russia have convinced many in the country that corrupt interests were behind the shortage of elementary medication as well as the ban on imports of many kinds of needed drugs (Kommersant, January 29). Furthermore, Muscovites are growing angry about the hugely expensive business project, initiated by Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, to pave the capital city’s sidewalks with tiles, which have proven to be dangerously slippery in the winter (Moskovsky Komsomolets, January 29). The combination of these irritants is generating a noticeable shift in public opinion: only 45 percent of respondents now believe that the country is proceeding in a “right direction,” from the peak of 66 percent in mid-2014 (Levada.ru, January 27).

This trend is moving so fast that the authorities can neither respond to the exploding problems nor pre-empt new ones, except by recycling the government’s well-worn rhetoric about its relentless struggle against corruption (Kommersant, January 26). A more radical message came from Chechnya, where republican head Ramzan Kadyrov declared that the US accusations against Putin amounted to launching a “real war” against Russia (Rbc.ru, January 29). Nothing is a step too far in the furious information campaign that Kadyrov has launched in the last few weeks, positioning himself as a leader in the “war” against the domestic opposition (Novaya Gazeta, January 27). This does not necessarily endear him to the wider Kremlin, where Putin’s siloviki (security services personnel) may entertain similar ideas about suppressing discontent with more determined repressions and exterminating particularly bold “traitors,” but cannot tolerate Kadyrov’s ambition to champion the case of a “firm hand.” Moreover, the security services are increasingly wary of his personal “army” of some 20,000 armed, para-military personnel (Carnegie.ru, January 28).

Putin, on the other hand, remains ambivalent to Kadyrov’s brazen attempts to shape the big political agenda. But he is even more reluctant to subscribe to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev’s government’s timid suggestions for reforms (Polit.ru, January 28). The main mechanism for his decision-making is now not the government but the Security Council, where the siloviki are in the majority and his loyal subordinate Nikolai Patrushev is in charge of the paperwork (Carnegie.ru, January 28). This mechanism, however, produces mostly demands for channelling money to various overgrown power ministry bureaucracies or, alternatively, suggestions to boost the tired “patriotic” cause, which has successfully camouflaged the metastasis of corruption in the last couple of years. This cause now needs more public-mobilizing events in response; but the risks inherent in Moscow taking any proactive steps are incredibly high, as yet another incident with the violation of Turkish airspace by a Russian bomber has shown (Rbc.ru, January 30).

Putin has always preferred bluffing to commitment, and he is obviously at a loss about how to react to the deepening economic crisis, which has overturned all his beliefs about the guaranteed prosperity of owners of natural resources that forever grow in value. He knows how to control the distribution of massive petro-revenues and how to turn corruption into a loyalty-building apparatus, but he seemingly has no clue about controlling the cuts in money flow or concealing the Russian elites’ corrupt appetites. One unshakable rule in his peculiar code of conduct is that personal insults cannot be left unanswered. But he is fast running out of further game-changing asymmetric answers to his mounting challenges. Ukraine is no longer a convenient target, as the Minsk process is deadlocked and a winter offensive would require a laborious mobilization of depleted resources (see EDM, January 21). Syria has become an entrapment, so instead of sabotaging negotiations, Moscow needs them to open an opportunity to escape from the intervention. The situation looks desperately inescapable, and Putin can only play on the awareness of his counterparts that a cornered rat could turn into a very dangerous animal. This argument, however, does not work for a cockroach.

Source: http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=45043&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=7&cHash=7e6834a147ca9e462bc253fcecebebeb#.VrDANVMrIo-

A report that appears fairly objective report in the context of a very emotional and highly biased situation.

I have no doubt the Jerusalem Post and the reporter are biased, plus there is no opposing opinion, but the article appears straight forward with minimum ‘propaganda’.

“Little Green Footballs” exposed massive anti-Israel bias in the past, an entire industry fabricating antisemitic stories.  The accusations have dwindled, now they appear renewed.  Perhaps they did not die down but I have not seen them.

I have seen no counter-accusations against Israel.

</end editorial>

MKs, IDF accuse media of fomenting conflict in West Bank; journalists’ groups say security forces are increasingly violent towards reporters.

Lawmakers and an IDF representative accused journalists of orchestrating events to make Israel look bad, during a Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee discussion Tuesday of violent incidents between security forces and the press.

“With all the importance of the press in a democratic country,” MK Moti Yogev (Bayit Yehudi) began, “we cannot get confused and must always give priority to the IDF’s operational freedom of action, because they are acting to save lives.”

Yogev accused the press of behaving like an “imbalanced theater.”

MK Yisrael Eichler (UTJ) compared the press to a car, saying that in some cases it is helpful and brings progress, and in other cases it can be destructive.

According to Eichler, a former journalist, objective reporters should be given freedom of action, but reporters who “take a side in the conflict” should be given less access.

MK Michael Oren (Kulanu) said there is no justification for violence against journalists, but added: “We cannot ignore the fact that the press takes an active, one-sided and tendentious stance in covering the conflict, and therefore, it is part of the game.

“We know with certainty about many cases that were staged and orchestrated, so the media needs to ask itself if it is truly balanced,” Oren stated.

IDF Spokesperson’s Unit representative Lt.-Col. Peter Lerner said forces in the field sometimes have to deal with “media traps” or events that would not have happened if the press was not present.

Lerner explained that the IDF works to allow the press to act freely, while considering operational limitations, and that aim is backed by military orders and regulations.

“We make sure to be in the field to help the press and when necessary, we act to prevent violent incidents,” Lerner stated. “The IDF Spokesperson’s Unit gives instructions and simulations at all levels in the field, under the assumption that [operations] will be covered [by the press] and documented.”

Lerner admitted that there was an increase of violent incidents in recent months, but said they are exceptions that do not reflect the general situation. He also pointed out that an officer who was violent towards the press was fired.

Zionist Union MK Ksenia Svetlova, a former Arab affairs reporter for Russian-language media who has written for The Jerusalem Post initiated the discussion, and said that “freedom of action for the media is a central component in a democratic state. Unfortunately, recently, it seems that some reporters are seen as the enemy or as a foreign agent acting against the State of Israel.”

“Violence against the press hurts Israel’s good name in the world,” she added.

Foreign Press Association Secretary Gila Sugarman said that in the past two years there has been an increase in physical violence against journalists and their equipment.

Union of Journalists in Israel chairman Yair Tarchitsky called the phenomenon fairly common and said the violence generally comes from low-level soldiers or police officers who are not aware of the way they should treat the press.

“The general feeling is that they see journalists as an annoyance,” he said. “Security forces have to understand the job of the press in a democratic country, even if the truth is uncomfortable for the country. Our job is to reflect reality as it is to the broader public.”

Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Tzachi Hanegbi (Likud) closed the meeting by calling the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit to review the complaints from press representatives and make sure that they are present in sensitive situations to hold a dialogue with reporters.

“IDF commanders are not trained or authorized to deal with the press; it’s not their responsibility,” Hanegbi said. “They are focused on security and executing their operational orders. The IDF Spokesperson’s Unit must send people to events with the potential for conflict, in order to avoid obstacles to reaching operation goals, on the one hand, and harm to journalists’ work, on the other.”

Hanegbi also said he will discuss the issue with Interior Committee chairman David Amsalem (Likud), whose panel is responsible for overseeing police and border police actions, to hold a similar discussion about complaints of police treatment of the press.

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Journalists-orchestrating-events-to-make-Israel-look-bad-443594

– See more at: http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=Blog-when-will-united-states-have-national-cyber-incident-response-plan#sthash.sne7uREs.dpuf

Source: http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=Blog-when-will-united-states-have-national-cyber-incident-response-plan

Comrade Putin must be steaming, Lenin must be spinning in his grave and Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Y. Chaika must be both livid and embarrassed.

Pussy Riot, the Russian punk group, released a video which is sure to get them in very hot water. It is a blatant screaming statement against the fraud and corruption known as the Russian government. Focused in the crosshairs of this video is Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Y. Chaika, for whom the video is named.  Putin is featured in the background of many background portraits and Soviet leaders figure prominently in the backdrops.

This is a video for which the English subtitles work but, quite honestly, you will get the video without reading the words, but they do add – a lot.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is pure political warfare. It is hard hitting, injurious to the Russian governmental reputation and just absolutely delightful.

It’s actually well done and I have to wonder where Pussy Riot videoed this…

To the ladies of Pussy Riot.  If I were you I’d accept a tour of, say, America and Canada, in the very, very near future? Chaika is sure to invent some trumped up charges…

</end editorial>

Pussy Riot Video Mocks Russian Prosecutor Accused of Corruption

By ANDREW KRAMER FEB. 3, 2016

MOSCOW — Wearing police uniforms and fishnet stockings, they whip hooded prisoners and waterboard them in their prison cells. The well-made-up women gleefully throw wads of cash into the air and flirt viciously with their viewers.

The Russian punk protest group Pussy Riot sashayed back into the public eye on Wednesday with the release of a music video savaging the country’s prosecutor general, Yuri Y. Chaika, who locked up three members of the group in 2012.

It is a black satire of the Russian criminal justice system, in which the women, playing prison guards, rap lustily about money and torture a man with hot clothes irons.

The video for “Chaika,” a new performance by the Russian punk protest group Pussy Riot. Video by PussyRiotVideo

“I run the war on corruption here, or to be precise, I run the corruption,” the group’s leader, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, sings alluding to accusations of high-level wrongdoing in Mr. Chaika’s office.

Those accusations were brought by Aleksei A. Navalny, the anticorruption activist, late last year. Mr. Navalny suggested that Mr. Chaika’s son jointly owned a luxury hotel in Greece and villas in Switzerland with Olga Lopatina, the wife of a deputy prosecutor general.

Ms. Lopatina’s previous husband had ties to a notorious organized crime group in southern Russia, the Tsapok gang. Ms. Lopatina has denied the ties and sued Mr. Navalny.

Mr. Chaika denied wrongdoing. The Kremlin’s spokesman, Dmitri S. Peskov, said he would not comment on allegations concerning the grown son of a federal official.

Ms. Tolokonnikova was one of three members of the protest group who wereconvicted in 2012 for performing a protest concert in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow. Ms. Tolokonnikova and her bandmate Maria Alyokhina served a year and nine months in prison before they were released under an amnesty law before the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia. Another member of the group, Yekaterina Samutsevich, had been released on parole.

In the video, Ms. Tolokonnikova plays, with a sly smile, Mr. Chaika, her old nemesis.

“I love Russia, I am a patriot, but I could live in Switzerland,” she sings.

The young women sway to the tinny rhythm, gorge on a lavish feast in a palatial setting and pout at the camera. One wears a bird mask, a reference to Mr. Chaika, whose name means “sea gull.” Ms. Tolokonnikova alternates between flapping her hands like wings and forming pistols with her fingers.

A framed portrait of President Vladimir V. Putin, the type that hangs in official offices here, looks down on Ms. Tolokonnikova as she eats a gold-painted loaf of bread. And there are subtle hints at life inside the zone, the Russian penal colony system, such as a checkerboard drawn on a table with spilled sugar. The game pieces are also lumps of sugar.

“Be humble, learn to obey, don’t worry about material stuff,” Ms. Tolokonnikova rhymes sarcastically.

“And son, if you do worry about material things in life, then be loyal to Putin forever, son,” Ms. Tolokonnikova raps softly. “You want to get away with murder, be loyal to your boss.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/04/world/europe/russia-pussy-riot-yuri-chaika.html?_r=0

The New York Times editorial board seems to not understand how expensive building up a conventional defense in Europe will be, to the point where Russia takes a serious pause before attempting an invasion.

Perhaps the NY Times editorial board would prefer waiting until the Russians invade and then rub their hands together, saying “oh my”, thus abandoning all hope for Europe?  Perhaps they prefer a token force be there, a la Task Force Smith, as a symbolic show of resistance?  Perhaps they would prefer an air campaign (after the invasion) similar to Syria against a wall of S-400 systems backed up by even more S-300s?  Perhaps they would prefer Special Operations be used, like the now famous and formerly classified SEAL Team 6, showing they don’t have a clue how to defend against Russia?

How about the New York Times editorial board leave the military decisions to the military professionals, unlike our President?

</end editorial>

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD FEB. 3, 2016

The Pentagon has put Russia at the top of its list of national security threats with its plan to increase the deployment of heavy weapons, armored vehicles and troops on rotating assignment to NATO countries in Central and Eastern Europe.

In a speech on Tuesday, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter listed a hierarchy of threats to the United States, which included China, North Korea, Iran and finally, the fight against terrorism. But his primary focus was Russia.

While he makes a good case for deterring Russian aggression, his proposal to quadruple military spending in Europe in 2017 to $3.4 billion from $789 million seems excessive and raises questions about whether other immediate threats, like the Islamic State, are getting short shrift.

It is undeniable that Russia has become openly aggressive under President Vladimir Putin, who has violated sovereign borders by annexing Crimea and stoking civil war in Ukraine. A cease-fire in Ukraine was declared last year, but Russian forces still maintain a presence in eastern Ukraine, raising questions about whether Russia might try to extend its reach to the Baltic States.

There are other concerns as well. Russia has built a web of complex missile defenses that increasingly threaten NATO’s military access to airspace in parts of Europe, including one-third of the skies of Poland. Similar Russian missile buildups are underway in Crimea and in Syria, where the Russians have beefed up their air campaign on behalf of the Assad government.

Given the Russian moves, it’s important that the United States and NATO allies reinforce their commitment to the common defense, especially at a time when Europe is under great stress from the flow of Syrians and other refugees and the rise of anti-immigrant right-wing political parties.

Over the past two years, the United States has already increased its military exercises and rotation of forces in Europe. Mr. Carter’s new plan would ensure that the alliance can maintain a full armored combat brigade, roughly 5,000 troops, in the region at all times, including in Hungary, Romania and the Baltic countries. Under a 1997 agreement, NATO and Russia agreed not to permanently station troops or nuclear weapons on each other’s borders. The Americans say the plan would not violate this pledge because the troops will rotate, even though the effect will be a constant presence.

The increased American investment sends a message to Mr. Putin and provides leverage to demand that other NATO countries do more to increase their own defense budgets. But the sheer size of the spending increase seems like a return to the Pentagon’s blank-check ways during the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Even though the United States spends more on defense than the next seven countries combined, the Pentagon has been chafing under budget cuts. In fact, the increased money for European defense is supposed to come from a war account that pays for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which allows the administration to get around budget caps.

Deterring Russia is essential. But this initiative seems like a reversion back to what the Pentagon has traditionally done — prepare to fight big wars with ever more costly weapons against adversaries like Russia. Threats from the Islamic State and other terrorist groups are messier and harder to predict. America must be able to confront both, but it is unclear that Mr. Carter’s plan gets the balance right.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/opinion/the-pentagons-top-threat-russia.html

Published February 4, 2016

 by ELISE HU

On the fifth floor of South Korea’s sprawling National Library is a place far more fascinating than its name suggests: The North Korea Information Center.

Here you can read every edition of North Korea’s national newspaper, the Rodong Sinmun, dating to its first publication in the 1970s. Or peruse a collection of 100,000 North Korean books and videos — fiction, nonfiction and the complete teachings of the autocratic dynasty that runs the country.

In a dictionary, you can find the “Song of General Kim Il Sung,” with adoring lyrics:

North Korea Information Center librarian Jeong Hui-suk stands over a display of ticket stubs from North Korean theater programs and flights.

Elise Hu/NPR

“So dear to all our hearts is our General’s glorious name, our own beloved Kim Il Sung of undying fame … He severed the chains of the masses, brought them liberty, the sun of Korea today, democratic and free.”

Librarian Jeong Hui-Suk gives me a tour, pointing out the teachings of each Kim, separated into sections, as she walks us through the stacks. The space is airy and bright, with high ceilings and meticulously organized collections.

In addition to political propaganda, there is also a North Korean children’s book section. And there are textbooks. (Calculus problems are exactly the same in North Korea, but the textbooks have much less color.)

The library displays everyday items from North Korea of the 1990’s. Korean insam (ginseng) is used in toothpaste, soap and other products.

Elise Hu/NPR

Documents dominate the space, but you can see some other materials, too.

“These are everyday artifacts from the 1990s,” Jeong says, peering through a display box. “So there’s Korea insam, which is ginseng tea. There’s a fan. Insam soap. Ginseng soap.”

i

North Korea’s latest newspapers are purchased by the North Korea Information Center for its archive. The collection includes back issues of the Rodong Sinmundating to its first publication in the 1970s.

Elise Hu/NPR

The library sees about 15 to 20 visitors a day, a mix of South Koreans and researchers from other countries.

“There are very few places worldwide where you can get most of this stuff that is surrounding us,” says Christopher Green, a North Korea scholar from University of Leiden, who spends a lot of his time here doing research.

Researchers know about this place, which opened in the late 1980s during a thaw in inter-Korean relations. But the library isn’t advertised. Most South Koreans have never heard of it, and they can face jail time for having these materials out in the wild.

The books from North Korea are “essentially banned,” Green says. A Cold War-era national security law makes it illegal to share North Korean political documents. So none of the TV and film recordings can be checked out. Nor can any of the periodicals in the library be read online. South Korea blocks its Internet users from accessing North Korean sites.

The library has to work through the Korean Ministry of Unification to acquire materials by ordering through a government-to-government liaison or purchasing them from North Korea’s allies like China and Russia.

“There’s a lingering fear that North Korean propaganda and information could change the mindsets of South Korean citizens and make them susceptible to North Korean ideology,” Green says. “Perhaps an outdated view, but it’s still held by politicians here.”

The de facto censorship of this material makes it all the more surprising to South Koreans when they discover it.

“They can feel that North Korea does have a culture, too,” Jeong says. “And maybe they can want to help the North Koreans and be more curious. When they see North Korean books for the first time, they get really surprised because they say, ‘Oh, North Korea has books, too.'”

But not South Korean ones. As far as we know, there is no counterpart South Korea Information Center in the North Korean capital of Pyongyang.

Haeryun Kang contributed reporting to this story.

Source: http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/02/04/465126976/in-the-heart-of-seoul-a-trove-of-north-korean-propaganda

On January 28, 2016, Everything-PR published an article by Richard Pace titled American Government Should Stop Criticizing Russia’s Effective Public Relations Machine.

I’ll highlight a few excerpts and address each one separately.

“Russia simply has a better and stronger media message than the United States”

I absolutely agree. Not for the reasons Everything-PR cites, such as talent, truth or ineptitude.  Both Russia and the US have talent, including the folks at Everything-PR, their own version of the truth and certainly pockets of ineptitude.

Russia has a completely unfair advantage, which Everything-PR glaringly forgets to mention. Russia controls Russian media. This double-edged blade not only issues written guidelines to media, bloggers and trolls, but they actively regulate and suppress opposing opinions. This blog has been blocked in Russia four times in the past six months, I speak from actual experience.

“[T]he BBG named Russian media outlet, RT, as one of the major challenges facing America, along with ISIS and Boko Haram. Another super power – albeit one with whom America has differences with – should not be likened to terrorists who kill innocent people worldwide.”

Russia is not a super-power.  They have nukes, but they no longer wield the power, diplomatically, information wise, militarily or economically that the Soviet Union wielded. Russia reminds the rest of the world, frequently, that ‘we have nukes’, whenever they feel the need to assert power into a situation, but that is the only real power they have.  Unfortunately Everything-PR confuses local actions in East Ukraine and Syria as military power, which are tactical actions, certainly not operational or strategic. Russia’s 5:1 loss ratio while fighting Ukraine illustrates their military ineptitude. Their equipment is antiquated and rusty, as is illustrated by their frequent fighter and bomber crashes, due to 25 years of neglect and no maintenance funding.

“The BBG is obsessed that America is losing the Public Relations battle to Russia – although one wonders perhaps part of the issue is this Administration’s complete flip-flop on so many key issues.  And Hillary Clinton who recently called for a “no-fly zone” when Putin was bombing ISIS also does not make sense.”

The BBG’s mission is to promote democracy worldwide, especially in denied areas. Russia is becoming a denied area. Permits to operate foreign broadcast stations within Russia have been withdrawn, the Roskomnadzor, Russia’s internet censor bureau, blacklists and blocks opposition and opposing opinion websites globally, and Russia restricts foreign partial ownership of any Russian media to 20%, by law.  I am uncertain how Everything-PR defines “obsession”; it is BBG’s mission to promote the United States of America.

What in the hell does that statement about Hillary Clinton have to do with the article?  Fail.

Flip-flops by the administration?  Is this suddenly a political discussion? Another fail.

“Media reports indicate that RT’s total 2016 budget is 19 Billion rubles – approximately $200 Million. The BBG is projected to (waste? Flush down the toilet?) $751.5 million in 2016.  And despite America spending nearly four times more than Russia, the Kremlin is more effective at influencing worldwide opinion.”

The main problem here is that Everything-PR is focused on only one of Russia’s state-sponsored (bought, paid for and operated) ‘media’ outlet RT only.

A simple search reveals a few of the budgets for RT and others for 2015:

RT: $400 million

Rossiya Segodnya: $170 million

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/looking-west-russia-beefs-up-spending-on-global-media-giants/507692.html

The budget figures used by the Everything-PR article appears to be two, perhaps three years old.  What is your source that you are so terribly wrong? This makes me strongly suspicious of the rest of your article.

Please, Everything-PR, WHAT media reports?  You use BBGWatch, a highly biased anti-BBG site run by a disgruntled former employee for the BBG budget but you neglect to show your source for your obviously bogus RT budget. How could your numbers be so wrong?

RT and Rossiya Segodnya are only two of the dozens of state-sponsored news sites in Russia, and looking at only two outlets, Everything-PR is off by over $370 million.  For a fairly comprehensive list of Russian state-sponsored, Russian proxy sites and other news sites, please go to http://toinformistoinfluence.com/2015/11/15/russian-news-and-russian-proxy-news-sites/.

RT had so much money, you neglected to say, that in December 2014 they spun off a separate network, Sputnik International, with stations in most free countries of the world.  Speaking of which, why did you not include Sputnik International in your article?

“Russia is winning fair and square”…

In the entire article, these six words are the most egregiously wrong in the entire piece of… writing. First, there is no winning or losing. Your assertion that this is a competition is just wrong.

Second, “fair and square” implies ethics or morality is involved by both sides. The United States plays by the rules and embraces journalistic integrity, not necessarily PR rules where one can and often does say anything, no matter how far fetched, to promote their cause.

Russia routine, consistently and continually lies, fabricates stories, they misinform, they use disinformation, they distort, they use racial, religious and hateful political cartoons, and it is all well-coordinated in something called Information Warfare.  Information Warfare also includes something called Active Measures, a carryover from the Soviet Union. Stories are often planted in a third party news site in, for instance, India. This story is later cited as the source for an equally fabricated malicious piece, often accusing the United States of something illegal but preposterous. See Operation Infektion for a shining example. Russia does the same thing today, using mostly Russian proxy sites I list here: http://toinformistoinfluence.com/2015/11/15/russian-news-and-russian-proxy-news-sites/.  The difference is these stories are now heaped on top of stacks of other lies and it gets difficult to uncover and counter all the lies. Their quality is poor, a marked change from Soviet Active Measures.

For the past 24 months, this blog has attempted to identify the massive propaganda efforts by Russia. I’ve since been joined by hundreds of others around the world, including NATO and the EU. To say Russia does anything “fair and square” is completely disingenuous and just plain wrong.

“We thoroughly agree with a recent op-ed in Russia Today,  which notes that, “..when you also consider the sheer size of the US private news media industry – most of it loyal to the government’s foreign policy platforms – Russia’s spending in this regard is truly a drop in the bucket.””

I have heartburn about using an RT article as a source in your article with a dearth of proper sources.  RT is, without a doubt, one of the worst violators of journalistic standards in Russian media today.

“loyal to the government’s foreign policy platforms”?  This is the same media that questions every foreign policy decision made by the President or recommended by State?   This is the same media that publishes when liars, lawbreakers and anything slightly corrupt is exposed?  This is the same media allowed to disagree by the 1st Amendment?  Please, pray tell, show me anything even slightly akin to this in Russia?  Even the Moscow Times is beginning to knuckle under to the Kremlin since their Finnish majority ownership was sold to a Russian – mandated by Russian law.

If Everything-PR limits their Russian media view to one media outlet, RT, not only is their perspective completely out of whack with reality, it is also completely biased.

I, personally, have conferred with the BBG about Measures of Effectiveness with two different Directors of Research. The BBG answers to the American taxpayer, not Everything-PR. They are doing their best to become more efficient and effective, but if your two sources for this article are biased against the BBG from the outset, your article is certain to be skewed.  Whatever happened to objectivity?

The article is factually grossly flawed and just plain wrong.  Richard Pace did inadequate research, forgot to take an objective approach and neglected to show any other side other than his bias.

Everything-PR and Richard Pace – for shame.

Source: https://informnapalm.org/en/feb05-crimea-bal/

By alexander | on 02/05/2016

We continue to document and identify the weaponry and equipment of the Russian occupation forces in Crimea. The current OSINT investigation shows intelligence data on the exact location of the Russian ‘BAL’ coastal surface-to-ship missile complexes of the newly created 15th coastal defense missile-artillery brigade. The equipment for this unit has been transferred to the Crimea from the Republic of Dagestan, Russia.

One of the main reasons to capture the Crimea was practical implementation of the so-called ‘advanced military presence’ doctrine. After the annexation, the once flourishing Crimea becomes now a military base, a kind of ‘natural aircraft carrier’. This trend continues to persist at the expense of social and economic development of the region.

Besides that, starting from March of 2015, the Russian occupation forces have built up the air defense forces by moving to the peninsula several anti-aircraft missile systems. In particular, the 46th separate coastal defense missile Marines division (military unit No. 85103, Caspian Flotilla, Kaspiysk, Republic of Dagestan, Russia) was relocated to Crimea in 2014. It has the latest ‘BAL’ mobile coastal surface-to-ship missile systems (NATO reporting name: SSC-6 ‘Sennight’).

• Information about ‘BAL’ coastal surface-to-ship missile system

The division mentioned above has 4 launchers, the control center and a transporter and is included into the 15th brigade (military unit No. 80365, Sevastopol, occupied Crimea).

It is noteworthy that there are almost no materials about its ‘interior life’ in open access. The photos of ‘BAL’ systems on a parade or training were the rare exceptions. The InformNapalm’s volunteers were able to unveil new details about the military equipment and personnel of the brigade (thanks to a Russian officer who uploaded all the needed information to his social profile).

Background data:

• Name: Melnikov Nikolai Petrovich
• Rank: senior lieutenant
• Born: in Kazan on November 3, 1990
• Education: Kansk Naval Sea Cadet Corps (Kansk, Russia), Tikhookeansky Makarov Higher Naval School
• Car: license plate No. ‘m863OE (123)’
• Skype: nikolay23544
• VKontakte: profile (archive of profile, album)

In 2012-2013 Melnikov posted a lot of photos from his service in Caspian Flotilla in the 46th separate coastal defense missile Marines division. This is justified with the geotags (Karabudakhkentsky raion of Dagestan, Kaspiysk) and other characteristics (specific military equipment, landscape, etc). The officer has a lot of pictures in his profile – many of them disclose the workflow of the 46th brigade at those times and the names of the brothers-in-arms. But we will use only several photos from that period – the ones which show of the ‘BAL’ complex elements.

The picture made by Melnikov on October 22, 2012, draws our attention. The comment below it says: “Helicopter pad. It arrived from Mozdok, we were fueling it. Then it flew away to bomb the bearded”.

The ‘Crimean period’ of this ‘talented’ Russian officer’s service is the most interesting for us. The first pictures were uploaded in September of 2014. The picture showing his new shoulder straps of the senior lieutenant has the ‘Sevastopol‘ geotag. The inscription on the straps says: “Senior Lieutenant Melnikov Petrovich. KUVO’s [abbreviation of the Command of the Southern Military District] order No. 117 from June 23, 2014”.

The next photo registered the movement of the division’s equipment convoy (Mykhailivka village near Saky town, to the north-west of Simferopol). The coordinates are 45°06’44.1″N 33°38’49.6″E

Of course, such officer could not be left without a ‘For the Return of Crimea’ medal. And here it is (order by the Russian Ministry of Defense No. 411 from July 1, 2014, signed by colonel Oleg Budanov, the commander of the military unit No. 80365).

As it was previously mentioned, this military unit No. 80365 is the 15th coastal defense brigade. This means that it is documentaly proved that the Dagestanian ‘BAL’ complexes became the Crimean.

Georeferencing of the ‘BAL’ complexes in the Crimea

During the investigation of the Melnikov’s social profile, we found several locations where the ‘BAL’ systems were noticed.

Location 1

• Date: April, 2015
• Landmark: 44°29’52.7″N 33°32’50.1″E, to the east of Cape Fiolent near Sevastopol

Location 2

• Date: November 2, 2015
• Landmark: 45°23’26.7″N 32°29’47.1″E, Olenivka village in Chernomorsk raion, near Cape Tarkhankut

One of the 5 vehicles had a military license plate No. [0680 АО (21) ]

A field camp at the same location was registered in November of 2015. The photo shows Melnikov with his subordinates.

It should be noted that the locations of the ‘BAL’ systems are pretty vulnerable for guerrilla raids and are the primary targets in case of military conflict buildup on the peninsula. The locations where the ‘BAL’ complexes of the 15th brigade have been noticed are shown on the map.

In conclusion, the InformNapalm international community’s volunteers wish the officer of the Russian occupation forces ‘success’ in his future service in the sunny Crimea. We are grateful for the assistance in the disclosing of restricted information. Probably, his subsequent ‘career’ after this publication will be characterized by a photo from the period of his service in Dagestan [inscription on the water melon – ‘ass’].

(CC BY)

Original article by Nikolay Mahno, translated by Stepan Grishin

Source: https://informnapalm.org/en/feb05-crimea-bal/

04.02.2016 | 14:51

Among those surveyed, 59% of respondents would support becoming a member of the EU, 22% of respondents said they would vote against such move, the rest could not answer the question or refused to participate in the survey.

At the same time, based on results of the public opinion survey, only 16% of respondents would favor Ukraine’s membership in the Customs Union, while 62% of respondents would be against it, while the rest could not answer the question or did not participate in the survey.

Regarding the NATO membership, the survey showed that 47% of respondents would favor joining NATO, while 31% of respondents would turn down such move, the rest could not answer the question or did not take part in the poll.

The survey was held by the sociological group Rating between January14 and January 22, 2016. A total of 2,000 citizens aged 18 years and older were surveyed. The survey was conducted in the format of personal interviews. The poll’s margin of error was 2.3%.

Source: http://www.unian.info/society/1255397-majority-of-ukrainians-would-favor-ukraine-membership-in-eu-and-nato-poll.html

201.

Russian media widely reported that refugees in Germany kidnapped and gang-raped a 13-year-old Russian girl. These claims were disseminated as irrefutable facts by numerous Russian mainstream media publications, including Vesti, TV Zvezda, NTV, REN TV,Channel 1 and others. Russian TV shows used the video, purportedly depicting the confession of a migrant, admitting to the gang rape in question.

Having investigated these allegations, German police officially refuted them. “Confession of a migrant,” used by Russian media outlets to substantiate their allegations, was taken from a 2009 video.

202.

“Komsomolskaya Pravda” deliberately misquoted statements by Germany’s Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, claiming that he said: “The rape of a 13-year-old girl from Berlin is our internal affair.”

In reality, Steinmeier said that this case (not “this rape”) is Germany’s internal matter that is being investigated and Russia should stop using it for political propaganda. Germany still insiststhere was no kidnapping or rape in this instance.

Investigation by German law enforcement officials determined thatthe girl (Lisa) deliberately hid from her parents at her friends’ house, because the school was about to notify Lisa’s parents about her learning issues. She was neither kidnapped nor raped.

203.

Zvezda claimed that “Ukrainian Neo-Nazis” created a swastika-shaped baptismal ice hole. To corroborate their claims, Zvezda used a 2012 photo from Russia in one of its many incarnations. After this fake was exposed, Zvezda deleted their Tweet and the article itself.

204.

Russian media has been eagerly stoking anti-refugee sentiments in Europe. While reporting on a refugee-related protest in Finland, Sputnik was apparently not impressed by the small number of participants. Thus, Sputnik’s article featured an unrelated photo of a large crowd in Helsinki.

The photograph inappropriately used by Sputnik depicted fans arriving for the gold medal celebration of the junior ice hockey team, next to the Olympic Stadium in Helsinki. After this fake was exposed by Twitter user Verkkomeedio and RussiaLies.com, Sputnik replaced the photo associated with this article and deleted their original Tweet.

205.

RIA Novosti proudly showcased Crimea’s bright holiday lights in Sevastopol, Crimea, reporting that the town was lavishly illuminated for the New Year’s celebration, in spite of electricity shortage.

In reality, this photo depicted holiday lights in Moscow – not in the occupied Crimea. RIA Novosti was well aware of this fact, having previously used the same image with a correct description.

206.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov falsely claimed that the Budapest Memorandum contained only one provision: not to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.

In reality, the Budapest Memorandum contained six provisions and Russia already violated five of them.

207.

Russia’s Ministry of Defense claimed that Russia’s airstrikes destroyed ISIS oil storage facilities.

In reality, Russia destroyed grain storage facilities. In fact, Russia had to know what it was bombing, since grain storage facilities in Russia look nearly identical to the ones they bombed in Syria.

208.

Doing its best to stoke religious tensions in the West, Vesti reported that 200 Muslims in the U.S. were fired solely for praying at work.

In reality, workers were never prevented from praying, but wanted to pray in larger groups (which could not be accommodated at the meatpacking plant due to production safety standards). They were fired not for praying, but for failing to show up to work for 3 consecutive days.

209.

Russia’s state-owned Vesti & RIA Novosti published fake report by notorious Iranian FARS agency, accusing U.S. of delaying anti-ISIS operation in Iraq by evacuating ISIS leaders.

FARS is hardly mainstream and its “reports” simply cannot be taken seriously.

210.

TV Zvezda claimed that Joe Biden proposed to break up Ukraine into a number of independent states.

Biden made no such proposal. In reality, he was merely discussing history of the United States. Mr. Biden noted: “This issue of federalism is the thing that almost prevented our nation [the U.S.] from coming into being. Autonomous, independent states with determination to have their own police forces, their determination to have their own education system,  to have their own government under a united constitution.”

211.

Russia’s state-owned Vesti and other media outlets claimed that Turkish fishing boat tried to ram a Russian destroyer.

In reality, the fishermen didn’t even know it was a Russian warshipand were so far away, they didn’t realize they were being fired upon.

212.

RT claimed that Italy blocked the extension of sanctions against Russia. In reality, this claim was baseless and was refuted by Italian officials.

RT later had to acknowledge that Italy did not attempt to block the extension of sanctions.

213.

In Russia’s Ministry of Defense briefing, military officials claimed to identify “the largest logistical support center” for Turkey’s illicit oil trade with ISIS.

In reality, this is a parking lot for Iraqi Kurdistan trucks awaiting customs inspection.

214.

Little town of Genichesk, Ukraine recently experienced severe gas shortages. This was caused by the longstanding arrangement to store the excess gas (produced during summer months) in the occupied Crimea. In January 2016, the authorities in occupied Crimea blocked stored Ukrainian gas from being reverse-distributed to Genichesk. When Ukrainian authorities reported the absence of Crimea reverse gas supply, Russian media saw yet another opportunity for propaganda.

Russia’s state-owned Vesti and numerous other media outlets falsely claimed that the Mayor of Genichesk appealed directly to Vladimir Putin. They alleged that in response to this urgent plea, Russian gas was immediately provided to save freezing Genichesk. In reality, Ukrainian gas stored in occupied Crimea was finally reversed (as it should have been to begin with). The Mayor of Genichesk never reached out to Putin and communicated about this situation only with Ukrainian authorities.  

215. 

Russian media, public figures and government officials exploded with outrage over an alleged decision of a European court, prohibiting baptism of newborn babies.

In reality, this is a fabrication, based on a long-debunked false claim.European court did not enter any such ruling. The journalist named in false reports (Andrew McFarrell) does not write for The Timesand quite possibly does not exist.

216.

Putin proudly announced that Russia developed and registered “the best Ebola vaccine in the world.” Russian media happily disseminated this claim.

Experts immediately raised doubts about Putin’s assertions. Ira Longini, a professor of infectious diseases at Florida University’s Emerging Pathogens Institute, who helped develop an Ebola vaccine with very high success rate in clinical trials and which is the only vaccine to have passed the highest stage of testing, called the claims nonsensical. Longini found Putin’s statements “shocking” and “kind of mind-boggling.” He said: “Even if they got their vaccine through Phase 2, they wouldn’t be able to test it. You have to have Ebola transmission happening somewhere to test it… You could never get that vaccine licensed anywhere. Well, maybe in Russia.”

217.

A detailed UK inquiry has concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin probably approved the operation by Russian agents to kill former FSB spy Alexander Litvinenko in 2006.

In response, Russian media exploded with a number of conspiracy theories: claiming that polonium was planted to frame Russia, alleging that polonium can be cheaply and easily produced anywhere in the world (and didn’t originate in Russia), accusing the MI6 of killing Litvinenko and, most outrageously, claiming that Litvinenko (along with the CIA and the MI6) stole the polonium from Russia, transported it through Turkey and then poisoned himself.

All of these preposterous conspiracy theories further expose Russia’s desperation to deflect attention from the Kremlin’s undeniable responsibility and Putin’s involvement in sanctioning the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko.

218.

Russian media proudly reported that Foreign Policy rated Vladimir Putin as one of top 100 leading “global thinkers.”

In reality, the Foreign Policy’s rating was hardly flattering. It mentioned Putin “playing peacemaker while dropping bombs” in order to force his way into a position of bigger influence in global affairs.

219.

Russian media gleefully reported that Leonardo DiCaprio was confirmed as a lead actor set to play Putin in an upcoming feature film. These claims were echoed across multiple publications andInternet media outlets.

DiCaprio’s affiliates promptly debunked these claims, describing them to be “completely false.” The actor is not attached to the project in question.

220.

RT translated and reprinted asinine claims that Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Victoria Nuland hurried to Russia to warn Kremlin aide Vladislav Surkov that “NATO attack against Russia is imminent.” RT found these allegations on a blog website, Agora Vox, which later deleted the posting. The “article” in question originated on a notorious conspiracy website, WhatDoesItMean.com. It regularly publishes outlandish and ridiculous fabrications.

In reality, Nuland and Surkov met to discuss the situation in Eastern Ukraine and the implementation of Minsk agreements.

Source: http://www.russialies.com/russias-top-220-lies-international-edition/

This week Kyiv Post journalist Mark Rachkevych guest hosts StopFake News. This week’s fakes include a story about continued Azov threats against the Netherlands; fake claims about Ukrainians massively fleeing to Europe but being denied visas; yet another fake about rejection of the Ukrainian language, and a property restitution that will most likely never be.

Source above.

This blog is based on a reply I received to a review of an article. Chances are none of you read the comments and fewer read my replies.  I thought I would bring my reply out, edit it and publish it as a stand-alone blog.

The BBG, State and other ‘Inform and Influence’ professionals are archaic, in that there is a dearth of hard facts, quantifiable evidence or hard studies in articles regarding ‘US PR’. Even the Congressional bills, in reference to the BBG and other “Strategic Communication” aspects on behalf of the United States neglect to hold the BBG accountable to hard scientific facts. In other words, because what the “Inform and Influence professionals” and others have done, for the past 70 years, is based on a gut feeling.  It is highly inefficient, not based on quantifiable facts and the press is right when excoriating the BBG for possibly/probably wasting taxpayer money.

Just because you and others have tons of experience in journalism does not make any of you experts in Strategic Communication, Public Diplomacy, Inform and Influence Activities or promoting Democratic behaviors and attitudes. Again, ALL the congressional bills, statements and actions are based on “gut feelings”, “experience” and ‘the same old, same old’, packaged up in shiny new paper.

For decades I have advocated scientific, quantifiable research be conducted to create not only hard evidence of what really works, and create global baselines. Additionally new technology is becoming available which gives yet another, probably better, approach to gathering quantifiable data. We need to establish baselines and frequently (periodically) gather evidence of if what we are doing is effective or not. Or not… and then adjust. Not pour more money into ‘more, more, more’.

In December I was shocked when a Psyop person at a major command told me (and others) “We have no way to measure the effectiveness of what we do”. If that is true there, I am absolutely positive we lack those tools at the BBG and elsewhere.  Why am I so positive?  We talked, face to face, at the beginning of this year.

I am going to use a loosey-goosey term here, scared, but it the only word that I think works.  At least one senior at the BBG is “scared” of using Measures of Effectiveness because it is not 100% certain.  My response was that this is the nature of human behavior, nothing is certain. I might give you an 85% surety measurement, but the human animal cannot be predicted.  The esteemed group of seniors at the BBG with whom I conferred understood the statistical elements and aspects of MOE, but having to stare a Congressperson in the face and tell them “we don’t know for certain” scares the hell out of anyone, so I don’t blame them.

The BBG is doing things, in my opinion, on a shoestring budget. How are we, including State, going to convince the rest of the world that Democracy and the United States are good if we, inform and influence professionals, cannot convince Congress we need more money for studies, tools and critical resources? “Experience”? “Gut feeling”? “Decades in ‘journalism'”? What in the living hell qualifies you to do inform and influence activities on behalf of the United States of America? That’s like asking a domestic politician to convince another country about anything…

We, the unwilling, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much, for so long, with so little, we are now qualified to do anything with nothing.
― Konstantin Jireček

I look forward to positive suggestions, positive recommendations of what should be done and any recognition of what BBG and their subordinate bureaus might have done, are doing or will be doing.

Respectfully yours,

Joel Harding

Russia is touting their arctic-warfare capabilities in a new video but they are inadvertently threatening Norway, a NATO member.

At 2:49 of the video, ABANDONED Arctic Military base re opened to challenge US Military & NATO Power, the Russian ArmedForcesUpdate says their 80th Brigade is equipped to operate on separate “islands and archipelegos”, such as “Novaya Zemlya, Franz-Joseph Land, and Spitsbergen”.  Spitsbergen belongs to Norway. Norway is a NATO country.  

Why would Russia mention plans to operate in a NATO country?

Oversight and misspoke, my ass.

I was fine with this article until I reached the very last line.

The entire article is about changing US Navy Information Dominance Forces to Navy Information Warfare Forces.  Then, the last line is: “For more news from Navy Information Dominance Forces, visit http://www.navy.mil/local/navidfor/.”

</end editorial>

Michael Colborne, National Post | February 4, 2016 | Last Updated:Feb 4 6:28 AM ET

We can complain all we want about lying politicians in our own country, but last week Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stepped up and showed us how it’s really done: without batting an eye, he told a press conference that Russia had never violated the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the agreement that guaranteed Ukraine’s territorial integrity (including Crimea) in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

“If you’re talking about the Budapest Memorandum, we have not violated it,” he told a journalist. “It contains only one obligation — not to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.”

There’s a few big problems with that statement, least of which is the fact that there are actually six obligations in the Budapest Memorandum, and the first of them is “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”

Even worse was the Russian embassy in the U.K.’s ham-handed attempt to broadcast Lavrov’s bold new interpretation on Twitter. It provided a link to the text of the Budapest Memorandum itself with all six obligations, including the ones Russia has clearly violated — right there for everyone to see.

Keep in mind that Lavrov wasn’t just Russia’s ambassador to the UN back in 1994; he actually signed the original Budapest Memorandum. He hasn’t been foreign minister for 12 years because he’s an idiot. He was lying, he knew he was lying and he knew everyone knew he was lying — and he didn’t care.

In the words of American diplomat Steven Pifer, who helped negotiate the Budapest Memorandum, “what does it say about the mendacity of Russian diplomacy and its contempt for international opinion when the foreign minister says something that can be proven wrong with less than 30 seconds of Google fact-checking?”

The answer: it says that, when it comes to the Kremlin, we’re dealing with a way of lying we’re not used to seeing. It’s a black-knight-from-Monty-Python-esque style of lying that makes dealing with Putin and company on issues like Ukraine and Syria such a nightmare.

Yes, our politicians lie, but they tend to be a bit more crafty about it. They lie by omission: they’ll answer part of a question; they’ll fudge a number or base a figure on something that doesn’t make any sense. Our politicians don’t often stand up and tell us something we all know is a total lie.

Why? Because, believe it or not, our politicians actually have some respect for us. They know we can go online and check the veracity of something before they’ve even finished their speech. They know we have a media that, for all its faults, will gleefully call them out on it. When they lie, they want us all to believe it.

It doesn’t matter if you actually cut Putin’s arm off. He doesn’t care that you can see it right there on the ground

Russian politicians, on the other hand, aren’t interested in concepts like respect or believability. It doesn’t matter if you actually cut Putin’s arm off. He doesn’t care that you can see it right there on the ground. “’Tis but a scratch,” he’ll say. He won’t budge. And he’ll insist it’s a flesh wound until, like his admission of Russian soldiers in Crimea, he quietly admits that, yeah, you did actually cut it off. But then he’ll go one step further and deny ever denying that you cut it off.

It’s a kind of mental gymnastics that drives Russia-watchers like me up the wall, and it extends to Russia’s echo-chamber state media. Russia’s Channel One fabricated a now-infamous story of a young boy apparently being crucified on a bulletin board in a town square by the Ukrainian army. They also told Germany’s large Russian-speaking diaspora that a young Russian-German girl was kidnapped and raped by migrants in Berlin, even though it’s since come out that she was hiding from her parents. The TV station Zvezda has even made up quotes from Western journalists to lend credibility to fake pro-Kremlin stories.

It’s hard for us to grasp the ridiculousness of all this, but that’s because these lies really aren’t designed to convince anyone. If these lies convince just a few nutters or populist politicians in Europe to mouth off and shift the debate Moscow’s way, then they’ve succeeded. But as we in the West finally begin to pay more attention to the Kremlin’s antics, we’re starting to catch on.

National Post

Michael Colborne is a Canadian journalist and writer.

Source: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/michael-colborne-russias-bald-faced-lies