Tweet
'Hollywood techniques used to create pretext for war between Ukraine and Russia'
http://on.rt.com/ez47ed
Published time: August 29, 2014 14:56
Members of Ukrainian self-defence battalion "Azov" march in support of
soldiers that protesters say are surrounded in eastern Ukraine by
pro-Russian separatists, in front of the Presidential Administration
office in Kiev, August 27, 2014. (Reuters / Valentyn Ogirenko)
It is very suspicious there are no facts or proof of the activities
Russia is blamed for in Ukraine, areas that are subjected to a high
level of surveillance by satellites and all kinds of technology,
author and media analyst Daniel Schechter told RT.
RT: The UN says it cannot prove there are Russian troops on Ukrainian
soil - but media outlets seem to be more then eager to report such
allegations. Why is that?
Daniel Schechter: Every journalist likes to know what the facts here
are so we can determine, what is actually happening. And instead what
we see here are claims which do not seem to have underlying facts. As
a consequence, the President of Ukraine is calling this an invasion
and then he said "I'm not calling this an invasion, it's a sort of
incursion, and there are troops here." But there has been very little
evidence of that. There was one really remarkable image that I saw: a
soldier of the Ukrainian army who said "I believe there were Russian
troops there. Can I prove it?" and then he put his fingers like zero -
"I can't prove it."
There seems to be a narrative that's fighting to be born here, with no
facts that are at least convincing to prove it. Namely that there is a
Russian invasion going on and of course everyone is acting as if there
is. NATO is having a big meeting and they are acting as if it is, the
New York Times and other news outlets are basically suggesting that it
is, with some of the reporters who have run grainy pictures of
so-called Russian soldiers in the east of Ukraine with the very same
journalists which had images of WMD's [weapons of mass destruction] in
Iraq years ago that turned out not to be true.
There is a lot of propaganda here, and certainly very little fact. I
keep feeling that I'm watching a re-run of the movie "Wag the dog,"
where a pretext is created for a war based on a kind of Hollywood
technique. If it is true - show me, prove it. To my knowledge, at this
recent meeting of the UN Security Council there was no proof really
produced, there was no documentation. You have got to remember that
this area is now subjected to a high level of surveillance by
satellites and all kinds of technology, so you would imagine that if
the US was able to come up with "facts" on the ground or proof, they
would cite it, they would show it but they haven't yet. And that is
what makes some of this very suspicious and certainly has taken an
informed debate and made it a speculative debate.
RT: There's been confusing rhetoric from Kiev, first they are crying
foul over an alleged invasion, and then just hour's later President
Poroshenko offers a joint patrol of the border. How does this add up?
Is the public buying this strategy of portraying Moscow as the dark
evil force behind any violence in Ukraine?
DS: As an American I keep flashing back to the Cuban missile crisis
when the US produced satellite images of Russian rockets on Cuban soil
and they were then withdrawn by then Soviet Union. "Got you," if you
will, proof was presented. Here we have a lot of claims and lots of
charges. Samantha Power, who is known for her very credible writing
about human rights, is calling the Russians liars but she is not
providing the credible alternative narrative. That is what is scary
here, that people that I want to believe, I really have to be very
skeptical about. I think the American people are skeptical and
certainly people from the rest of the world who find this extremely
difficult to follow, and then have the Ukrainian President say "Wait a
minute, why aren't just our soldiers and their soldiers patrol the
border" as if this relationship of trust is there. It sounds crazy to
me, and I'm sure it sounds crazy to a lot of people.
http://on.rt.com/ez47ed
Published time: August 29, 2014 14:56
Members of Ukrainian self-defence battalion "Azov" march in support of
soldiers that protesters say are surrounded in eastern Ukraine by
pro-Russian separatists, in front of the Presidential Administration
office in Kiev, August 27, 2014. (Reuters / Valentyn Ogirenko)
It is very suspicious there are no facts or proof of the activities
Russia is blamed for in Ukraine, areas that are subjected to a high
level of surveillance by satellites and all kinds of technology,
author and media analyst Daniel Schechter told RT.
RT: The UN says it cannot prove there are Russian troops on Ukrainian
soil - but media outlets seem to be more then eager to report such
allegations. Why is that?
Daniel Schechter: Every journalist likes to know what the facts here
are so we can determine, what is actually happening. And instead what
we see here are claims which do not seem to have underlying facts. As
a consequence, the President of Ukraine is calling this an invasion
and then he said "I'm not calling this an invasion, it's a sort of
incursion, and there are troops here." But there has been very little
evidence of that. There was one really remarkable image that I saw: a
soldier of the Ukrainian army who said "I believe there were Russian
troops there. Can I prove it?" and then he put his fingers like zero -
"I can't prove it."
There seems to be a narrative that's fighting to be born here, with no
facts that are at least convincing to prove it. Namely that there is a
Russian invasion going on and of course everyone is acting as if there
is. NATO is having a big meeting and they are acting as if it is, the
New York Times and other news outlets are basically suggesting that it
is, with some of the reporters who have run grainy pictures of
so-called Russian soldiers in the east of Ukraine with the very same
journalists which had images of WMD's [weapons of mass destruction] in
Iraq years ago that turned out not to be true.
There is a lot of propaganda here, and certainly very little fact. I
keep feeling that I'm watching a re-run of the movie "Wag the dog,"
where a pretext is created for a war based on a kind of Hollywood
technique. If it is true - show me, prove it. To my knowledge, at this
recent meeting of the UN Security Council there was no proof really
produced, there was no documentation. You have got to remember that
this area is now subjected to a high level of surveillance by
satellites and all kinds of technology, so you would imagine that if
the US was able to come up with "facts" on the ground or proof, they
would cite it, they would show it but they haven't yet. And that is
what makes some of this very suspicious and certainly has taken an
informed debate and made it a speculative debate.
RT: There's been confusing rhetoric from Kiev, first they are crying
foul over an alleged invasion, and then just hour's later President
Poroshenko offers a joint patrol of the border. How does this add up?
Is the public buying this strategy of portraying Moscow as the dark
evil force behind any violence in Ukraine?
DS: As an American I keep flashing back to the Cuban missile crisis
when the US produced satellite images of Russian rockets on Cuban soil
and they were then withdrawn by then Soviet Union. "Got you," if you
will, proof was presented. Here we have a lot of claims and lots of
charges. Samantha Power, who is known for her very credible writing
about human rights, is calling the Russians liars but she is not
providing the credible alternative narrative. That is what is scary
here, that people that I want to believe, I really have to be very
skeptical about. I think the American people are skeptical and
certainly people from the rest of the world who find this extremely
difficult to follow, and then have the Ukrainian President say "Wait a
minute, why aren't just our soldiers and their soldiers patrol the
border" as if this relationship of trust is there. It sounds crazy to
me, and I'm sure it sounds crazy to a lot of people.