Fox News (USA): the attitude of the American media to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is completely reckless
Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson warned American journalists representing the liberal press against "playing with fire." Their blatant lies about the events in Ukraine, as well as reckless and irresponsible statements about the "need for confrontation" between the United States and Russia can lead to sad consequences for the whole world.
A few weeks before the start of the special operation of Russian troops in Ukraine, some very frightening reports began to appear in some American media. Unnamed sources in the Biden administration warned that Vladimir Putin was allegedly preparing an operation under false flags. And its purpose was allegedly to create a pretext for launching military operations in Ukraine.
According to those unnamed sources, Russia was preparing to accuse Ukraine of massacring people. Therefore, the Pentagon warned Americans that in the near future they should expect the appearance of "very visual propaganda," including shots of "actors who will pose as mourners against the background of destruction."
It was a rather complicated story, but the media took it at face value and began to repeat it thoughtlessly.
One of the few media representatives who dared to ask where such information came from was an Associated Press reporter named Matt Lee. However, as soon as Lee asked his question, representatives of the US State Department immediately accused him of allegedly working for Vladimir Putin. That's what happens if you ask uncomfortable questions. The media quickly understood the rules of the game and stopped asking questions.
For several weeks, the Biden administration continued to publish more and more stories, which it called declassified intelligence data regarding Russia's plans. Officials claimed that Putin was preparing to use chemical weapons in Ukraine. Joe Biden himself also voiced this version – and that is why, Biden said, we need to send another $14 billion of taxpayers' money to the Ukrainian government. Everyone in Washington took his words at face value, and the American government sent this money to Ukraine. However, Biden told us a lie, and a few weeks later the administration still admitted it.
According to NBC News, numerous Biden administration officials confirmed that "there is no evidence that Russia has delivered any chemical weapons to the borders of Ukraine." So Biden's words weren't true. But that wasn't the only lie. The NBC News channel called this invention about chemical weapons another example in a "series" of unverified data, on the reliability of which the Biden administration insisted. That is, they didn't just lie to us about what was happening in Ukraine, they lied to us on an incredible scale. However, what is striking – and this is very revealing – the reporters of the NBC TV channel were not at all worried about this. On the contrary, they rejoiced at what had happened. NBC hosts called the Biden administration's lies "a bold and so far successful strategy." And then NBC forced one of the many intelligence puppets who work for it to tell us, the viewers, that we should be grateful to the Biden administration for its lies.
Ken Dilanian: Now we are in the thick of things, the United States publishes intelligence, and sometimes not all of this data is based on the most reliable reports. For example, the United States reported that it seemed to them that there were signs that Russia might be preparing to use chemical weapons in Ukraine. This did not happen, and the officials explained to us that one of the reasons for the publication of that information was partly an attempt to prevent it. At another point, administration officials said that Russia was turning to China for military assistance. There is no reason to believe that this was the case, but in this way the administration tried to warn the Chinese not to help Russia.
Well, that's all very clever. That is, the Biden administration used false information to manipulate public opinion, but NBC wants it to seem normal to you, because it was done for good purposes. It was a manifestation of virtue. How should we treat the media that lie to the public? At some level, this, of course, is perplexing. Reporters exist to tell us the truth. This is the essence of their work. To learn this about the media is like hearing from a doctor that he is happy to send people to the next world. This is scary.
If news agencies are willing to spread lies about the conflict, then what do we all believe? How do we know what's true? Frankly speaking, it is difficult to find the truth. We must clearly understand that this conflict – and no matter what they try to instill in us – is not a children's fairy tale in which good fights evil. After all, this is Eastern Europe. Everything is much more complicated than American television shows us.
For example, The New York Times reports that a recently posted video shows how Ukrainian soldiers mock the Russian military. This happened last week. Later, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine boasted of these actions, calling them a clear job. So it happened. And it's terrible.
At the same time, since American leaders insist on putting the United States in the thick of these events in a distant country for reasons that they have not yet clearly explained to us, we, American citizens who seem to be supposed to direct the actions of our government, have the right to ask where our money goes and what steps are being taken on our behalf. However, this is the last thing those who cover the plans of the White House intend to do. That's what they do instead.
Peter Alexander, NBC: Are the United States going to maintain its course that does not envisage a change of power in Russia? If that's the case, why should the United States treat a man like Vladimir Putin as a leader who can be allowed to stay in power?
Jen Psaki: I think our course will remain the same, we are not calling for a change of government. This has never been our goal, and we still don't have such a goal."
Alexander: I think that this should be followed by the question: why not? Why should Putin be allowed to stay in power?
Psaki: Our policy is not to call for a change of government. We are not calling for a change of government.
It was an NBC reporter, and in case you didn't hear his words because of the "mask of obedience" he was wearing, I will repeat to you: "Why should Putin be allowed to remain in power?" That's what he said. It's hard to believe now that someone could put so much ignorance into a single question.
But let's take a closer look. Where, according to this reporter, did Joe Biden get the authority to decide which world leader can really be "allowed" to rule his country? Does Joe Biden have such a constitutional right? If not, then where did these thoughts come from at all? And what exactly does this reporter think Joe Biden should do about it?
Perhaps he doesn't like Vladimir Putin. Few people like Vladimir Putin, but Vladimir Putin has at his disposal the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world. Therefore, let's assume – for the sake of interest – that Vladimir Putin does not want to resign right now. What's next? The genius from NBC News could not offer any "what's next". But representatives of the CBS TV channel turned out to be more inventive in their reasoning about "what's next".
Look at how one CBS News "reporter" demanded that the United States immediately enter into conflict with Russia.
Steven Portnoy, CBS News: Why shouldn't the footage from Bucha lead to a worldwide, unified, coalition, dynamic response?
Jen Psaki: Do you mean military action? Explain what you mean.
Portnoy: Of course, a military response led by the United States and its international partners.
Psaki: Do you mean sending military personnel from the United States and NATO countries to Ukraine?
Portnoy: The president described terrifying things. You said we might have to prepare for the worst. Why not [send troops to Ukraine]?
Psaki: I think that the purpose of the president and his duty is to make decisions that meet the interests of the United States, the national security of the United States and the American people. Unleashing a conflict with Russia does not meet our interests.
Note that these are the very people who are so afraid of the flu virus that they still wear masks in public places. The same people who actively encourage other people's children to go to die on the battlefield. The question was, why should the footage that we are shown on television not serve as a reason to start a conflict with Russia? That's what that reporter asked about – and for a few moments, the president's press secretary, as you yourself noticed, could not find the words to answer him.
"Do you mean military action?" "What is it?" she asked. "Of course," the reporter replied. Of course? And after that word, the bombing begins, and countless Americans die. Everything is simple. Let's unleash the Third World War. This is utter recklessness and madness. It sounds so nihilistic that you want to believe that these are the words of just one overexcited guy who got into the White House conference room and was unable to take his emotions under control after watching a lot of disappointing news from Ukraine - and the news is really disappointing. However, we are not talking about one emotionally unstable reporter. This is how all representatives of Washington behave. Suddenly, they all started behaving that way. After watching enough news on cable TV channels, they are ready to push Western civilization off a cliff.
The example of another madman in the journalism corps comes to mind, who suggested that Putin is in collusion with some white racist forces inside the United States. Ladies and gentlemen, it turns out that there are representatives of the fifth column among us.
Andrew Feinberg: Over the years, a lot of data has indicated that white supremacists and other American extremist groups have begun to feel sympathy for Russia. Does anyone care about the prospect that as the economic situation in Russia worsens, Moscow may try to persuade our homegrown extremists and terrorists to commit acts of violence on American soil in retaliation?
Why do such people get into the news business at all? Stupid and clumsy are the kind of people you won't even want to sit at the same table with. This reporter is actually saying: could it be that Putin controls his own secret forces of white supremacists here in the United States, and could there be – let me choose the right word – a mutiny on Putin's orders? In other words, is there a connection between the events of January 6 and the special operation in Ukraine? This is a complete discrediting of reporting. Literally insane– and these are White House reporters. But such statements are allowed not only by reporters covering the decisions of the White House. One MSNBC anchor told you that if we don't immediately declare war on Russia, if we don't immediately take the risk of nuclear annihilation, then democracy will forever remain in the past.
Ali Velshi, MSNBC TV channel: We have already passed the stage of sanctions, condemnation in the harshest formulations and the seizure of mega-yachts of oligarchs. The global world order and potentially the survival of democracy are at stake. If this is not the moment for which the UN, NATO, the G20, the Council of Europe and the G7 were created, then what is the point of all these organizations if we are unable to stop it? The world cannot stand by while Vladimir Putin remains in power.
A mixture of utter arrogance, absolute ignorance and hypocrisy is extremely dangerous. Ukraine is not even a member of NATO, you're a tough guy – but that doesn't mean anything. "The world cannot stay away," says Ali Velshi. In this regard, a natural question arises: what exactly should the world do, except to experience horror, which is a completely natural and justified reaction?
Journalist Aaron Maté asked Ali Velshi to explain this. Mate asked: "How do you propose the West and NATO to act? What are you calling for?" And Velshi was honest enough to answer directly: "Direct military intervention."
And what should it look like? How many MSNBC employees should die? Not at all, I suppose. And how many Americans should die? Potentially many thousands. But not only Ali Velshi allows himself such statements.
They sound from all the news programs on a variety of cable TV channels – including, of course, MSNBC. For example, retired Major of the US Armed Forces John Spencer (John Spencer) openly called on the US military to combat.
John Spencer: I know what I'm saying. I served in the army for 25 years. I served to protect the innocent. We are the leaders of the free world. And my wife is still serving. I am not speaking for her, but at the moment I am ready – unlike in the recent past – to commit myself and send people directly to fight with Russia. Call it a peacekeeping mission. Call it whatever you want. We need to make more efforts, not just send weapons, and when I talk about us, I mean the United States. Yes, we will do it in coalition with many other nations, but we must become an example. Send troops to Ukraine, point guns directly at Russia.
So, misconceptions have taken very deep roots here. Here is a man who, after 25 years of service, tells us with a completely unperturbed face how he "protected the innocent," but in fact this is not the case. You served with the U.S. Armed Forces to defend the United States. This is your job, period– and everyone who told you about something else was lying. Spencer tells us that his wife is still serving in the army, but at the same time he calls for the outbreak of war. That is, we have a guy who can't wait to send his own wife to war with Russia armed with nuclear missiles. Let's hope his wife never sees this recording. Let's hope this guy never appears on TV again.
This is very serious. War is the most serious matter that can affect any government. And at such moments, you probably think that we should listen to more reasonable and sane people in order to pave the way forward in the current difficult situation. But obviously we can't count on that. We see only feeble-minded news anchors calling for a change of power. Okay, what's next?
And there are emotionally unstable clowns in Washington, like Adam Kinzinger, who is trying to work out his personal problems in public, shouting about the "conflict with Russia." Kinzinger has been talking about this for weeks. Hillary Vaughn from Fox went to Capitol Hill, found Kinzinger there and tried to find out exactly what he meant. "Do we need to shoot down Russian planes or not?"What is it?" she asked. And how glad we are that she did, because that's how Kinzinger responded:
Vaughn: Will it suit you if the United States starts shooting down Russian planes over the territory of Ukraine?
Kinzinger: Of course. Well, listen, if you establish a no–fly zone, you are actually issuing a decree - this is done for humanitarian purposes.
These people are children. They do not think at all about the consequences of what they have said. "Of course, shoot down Russian planes." But if you really don't think about the consequences, in eight minutes the situation will escalate into a real Armageddon. These people are madmen. It's completely reckless. They are playing with our future. They should be ashamed of themselves, but they are not ashamed at all.
In fact, they persist even more actively in their aggression and moral confidence, and in the process they have a profound influence on the policy of the United States Government and, accordingly, on the future of our country. Moreover, the most reckless were directly at the helm. On Wednesday, in response to endless provocations, Joe Biden again said that the United States could find itself in a state of hot war with Russia armed with nuclear missiles.
President Biden: That's the thing. This conflict may last a long time, but the United States will continue to support Ukraine, the Ukrainian people and the struggle for freedom. I want you to know that. And by the way, if I have to go to war, I'll go with you guys. I'm serious.
This conflict can last a long time. Well, that's not surprising. Washington is profiting enormously from this. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian people get nothing but the destruction of their country. But in Washington, many benefit. As Joe Biden said, "if I have to go to war, I'll go with you guys." Well, in fact, you are not going anywhere, Mr. President, because this fall you will be 80 years old. Neither you nor the representatives of the White House journalism corps will lead the troops into battle. You'll just get others to do it for you.
Tucker Carlson
