Saturday, January 15, 2011

RT - More Important Than Ever To Watch International News

RT - Russian Television - is an English news broadcast from the nation of Russia.

It is an Al Jezeera type service, the goal of providing a perspective on the news that is outside of the scope and bias of the American news juggernaut.

Thanks to my Roku box I am able to watch:

  • RT
  • Al Jezeera
  • France 24
  • ANI (Asian News International) 
on a daily basis.

RT has become more important to me than "Al Jezeera" English because it is the voice of a more obvious adversary to the USA.  Each day they embed a blatantly critical report of the conditions of life, economics or "social justice" in the United States.   I have no problem with this inclusion.  I am merely observant of how much they go out of their way to find these points.   When it comes to the "context" of this information I determine the proportion of this news by balancing my knowledge of these points as an insider to this nation coupled with my consumption of "opposition news" inside of the USA - (ex: "Democracy Now").

I noticed that during an interview on RT - a professor from "American University" enumerated two forces in Tunisia - the "Right-Wing" establishment and then the "Democracy Movement".   This follows my observations earlier from "Democracy Now" in which Dr Francis Fox Pivens labeled America's political forces as the "Right-wing" and the "Democratic Party".   (She labeled herself as a Democrat).    

I figured that a transparent person would have labeled them as "right-wing" and "left-wing".   Instead they show their lack of transparency in that their own standing is considered the rational baseline position.  Their "right" adversaries are labeled as "right wing".   One is forced to note the rare references to "left-wing" on these opposition broadcasts.

The Start Treaty

During the "Lame Duck Congress" back in December when the START treaty was being negotiated I was made to agree that the Republicans were being overly obstructionist in their desire to seek a delay in the ratification.   The main reason why I felt this way and why I ultimately supported this treaty was because the fears that the treaty would prohibit construction of a US based ANTI-Missile or "Missile Defense" system would not be abridged.   Since we were told that credible military sources said this was not the case - I could not see any justifiable reasons to oppose the treaty.

Fast forward to RT today.   The Russian parliament - a body with absolutely no diversity (all old White males) is now debating the terms of START.   What is there main concern?    That the USA will "cheat" on the treaty by........................CONSTRUCTING A "MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM"!!!!!!   They fear that if the USA is wearing a "bullet proof vest" (my words) that their choice to reduce their number of bullets to shot through the vest will incapacitate their weapons load, requiring them to need more.  Why then reduce?

The English speaking Russian reporter from the parliament said that they are not so focused on the Obama Administration's commitment to hold the line on "Missile Defense" - they are looking as SUBSEQUENT ADMINISTRATIONS who might build it up.

Wait a minute.     As it stands right now I believe that the American public was LIED TO.  
In a quest to achieve a "victory" in support of this treaty the vital sticking point on Missile Defense was SPUN.  It is no surprise that the American Left has generally opposed the larger "Strategic Defense Initiative" or "Star Wars" from the start.  The smaller version called "missile defense" has been panned and attacked by Keith Olbermann, while others have said that it all is a waste of money.  Each time the US military and military contractor release a video of a successful termination of a missile in flight during a test we see a counter-report from an activist group of scientists showing how the simulation was incredible, lacking real world authenticity.  

After listening to the Russian reporter relay the sentiment from the legislators in Russia I am now made to key an eye on this entire exchange and question more of what we are told as American consumers of news from the government.   If talk about the Missile Defense System in Europe slowly fades away we will know that the talking points around START is responsible. 

Recall that the hostilities a few years ago between Russia and the country of Georgia was related to Georgia which borders Russia, becoming too close to the USA and NATO.   

I will commit to doing more research on this one.  The likely source of the missiles to be defended against is Russia.  Yet NATO - which was primarily created to defend against the former USSR has, for the first time in its history, invited the Russian leader to its meeting in order to negotiate with him on Missile Defense.  They are working out points of negotiation about the "flack jacket" that they want to construct in case the man they invited to the meeting starts shooting at them?  Something does not smell right.

From Nov 2010
Mr. Medvedev was invited to the NATO summit meeting Friday night, a major change from two years ago, when Mr. Putin crashed the NATO dinner in Bucharest, Romania, to lecture Mr. Bush about the dangers of NATO expansion to Georgia and Ukraine.

Russian and Georgia fought a small war later that year, and Russian troops still occupy two provinces of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. NATO officials contend that a closer relationship with Moscow is the best way to make progress on Georgia.

No comments: