Ukraine: A New Front

Over the past few weeks it’s understandable that the media (Guardian included) has taken a keen interest in the turmoil taking place in Ukraine. For all of the articles, opinion pieces and readers comments that discuss this ongoing & fluid situation – I feel that the following comment (posted by RadioPartizan on 26/02/14) sums up what many have noticed with regards to The Guardian’s overall reporting on the subject. The comment was left in response to the following article: Russia puts military on high alert as Crimea protests leave one man dead

Not too much hope of a ‘unity’ government seeing as the people in power in Kiev and western Ukraine has a distinctive nationalist agenda – one of their first acts was to ban Russian as an official language. Such acts are bound to increase the fears of ethnic Russians – many of whom see themselves as Ukrainian first and foremost.
Also I wonder if the guardian are aware that the red and black flag in the photo is that of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army? They were Ukrainian Fascists who at one point fought alongside the Germans in WW2 and were were heavily involved with war crimes against poles and jews. The symbol has been adopted by the right sector ultra nationalists – who seem to have a lot of influence over the interim government.
There are also a lot of reports – and some fairly convincing footage – of former government personal and offices being targeted by ultra-nationalists. There are also a lot of pictures of war memorials being pulled down and daubed in Swastikas and other nazi graffiti.
It seems that the Ultra nationalist militias have taken over security in Kiev and other parts of western Ukraine. Now some of this may well be exaggerated Kremlin inspired propaganda – but the air brushing of the far right out of this situation by the media has been astonishing – so its difficult to know what to believe.
Seeing as the Fascist Svoboda are being blandly described in this piece as ‘nationalist’ ( and have previously been described as ‘moderate’ in other articles in this paper) I really don’t trust the guardian (or any of the western media) any more than Russia Today.
Some links –
This is from Oblast in western Ukriaine and – as far as I understand it – features an Ukrainian ultra nationalist telling the administration there to stand down – at gunpoint.
This is from russia today – pics of war monuments lenin statues being pulled down and daubed with Nazi graffiti.

I have seen no attempt by the likes of the guardian to properly investigate and report the disturbing role of the far right in these events. It is certainly significant and it is certainly being airbrushed out of the news we are seeing – and it is also certainly being used by the Russians for their purposes.
So how about some proper balanced reporting for the first time in this whole sorry mess?
Or are we only going to find about this when the country descends in a Yugoslavia type cluster fuck with each factions nationalist militias marching around ethnically cleansing each other?


20 comments on “Ukraine: A New Front

  1. Joe Papp says:

    Just wondering what your thoughts are on Russia’s military invasion of Crimea, which obviously violates international law AND Ukrainian sovereignty, and the preparations for annexing said sovereign nation’s territory?

    Or will you not be condemning Russia’s naked imperialism, b/c you’re a mind-controlled Nashibot?

    • mantell101 says:

      This blog documents war propaganda and media bias on the Guardian website – it’s fairly self explanatory. Why on earth would I spend time writing posts condemning Russian imperialism? You think because I’ve highlighted the crimes committed by the Obama/Cameron Governments – that I automatically approve of the crimes committed by Putin? You need to grow up and stop viewing the world in black & white. All newspapers (Russian and English) need to be held to account if they regularly publish propaganda and media bias. I think any sane individual would agree with that.

  2. Douglas says:

    I have been staggered by The Guardian’s reporting on the Ukraine. The newspaper’s hatred of Putin and his actions seems to have rendered it almost incapable of criticism of the composition of the interim regime and examination of its legitimacy. Virtually no interest in treatment of the political forces that did best in the last democratic parliamentary elections. How can a newspaper of its traditions look with such benevolence on Svoboda and Right Sector? How can a newspaper of its traditions quote so much and with so little interrogation the statements of the interim government, Svoboda and Right Sector? Polling data has beeen repeatedly and deliberately misrepresented in Guardian spin. For a newspaper so keen on press freedom it is astonishing that it took over 24 hours to report Svoboda’s attack on the Ukrainian TV director. Describing Svoboda simply as a ‘nationalist party’ ( not a label they ever give the BNP). Editorials that would sit well in The Daily Mail. Coverage that insults the reader’s intelligence (e.g. quoting from Pravda with the obvious hope that it will be forgotten that Pravda is now just the mouthpiece of the minority Russian party that is the cheerleader of nostalgia for the Soviet era) and which one does not find in The Daily Telegraph’s more serious coverage. And within all of this one journalist above all catches one’s attention who I gather has particular reasons to spearhead the newspaper’s hatred of this Russia and thus cultivate Its benevolent treatment of what is surely (?) the government with the strongest Far Right representation in Europe. Criticise Russia’s actions and Russian thuggery by all means…but there has to be balance. I have never noticed bias to this level in The Guardian.

    • I’m so glad I found this blog, I totally agree with all of you posting here, e.g. the Guardian’s coverage of the Ukraine conflict has been abysmal, and will most certainly continue to be. The complete blackout of news reporting the fascist elements in the new government is astonishing. I absolutely don’t trust the Guardian. But what other mainstream alternatives are there for a jaded American news junkie? The NY Times has been shite since the Judith Miller imbroglio (but actually much earlier in truth). A little NPR anyone? I despise them–and to think they act like they’re the ‘smart liberal set’ or something. Quite the opposite in truth. But I digress, back to the main theme and that is for sure the Guardian has absolutely sucked on it’s Ukraine coverage, it reads quite obviously like propaganda, just horrible. I can’t bear to read the Guardian too often. Very limited news consumption online is highly recommended for a better life 😉

      • Ken says:

        I’m really glad another person, you!, has found this site. There are not many of us yet, but clearly a lot of the Guardian’s commentators are disgusted with the papers blatant lying and prejudice.

        I’ve been referencing the link to this site whenever I think I can get away with it on the Graun’s comments section without my post being banned. About half the time I get away with it. When they are on to me I just change my name, too easy.

        It is such a shame too as the Guardian , and before that its predecessor the Manchester Guardian, always tried to provide balanced copy, albeit from a liberal perspective.

        I’ve been reading this paper for over 50 years now, a true Guardianista, but now have to rely on a range of sources from the net to get a balanced perspective…Guardian, Telegraph, RT, Washington Post,You tube etc

        I dont know why the Guardian has moved the way it has but suspect a number of reasons…

        1. Pressure from right wingUK Government who allocate public sector ads ( an important income source now that the paper is losing money),

        2. D-notices (all UK media is controlled and effectively censored by the government through a system of D-notices–never mentioned or allowed to be mentioned in the press)

        3. Pressure from GCHQ/NSA since the Snowden leaks, where the Guardian for once did take the moral high ground.

        4.The Guardian’s new business model based on click bait.

        Anyway, good to see you here, welcome to sanity. Maybe we need our own news blog on the web, I don’t know. 1984 is coming it seems, just a bit late.

  3. Ken AQlexander says:

    I have noticed the Guardian become increasingly less objective since Snowden’s revelations. Whenever I dare comment on this my post is immediately removed and often I am then banned from all further commentary. Below is a copy of the latest example.

    “A lot of us have noticed that since Snowden’s revelations the Graun has become much less objective in its reporting (BBC also). In the case of Crimea the Graun has behaved almost as a mouthpiece for NATO propaganda. Not only that but any comments on this issue of the Graun’s standards are often quickly removed, frequently without any statement on community standards.

    what is going on? has the Graun been infiltrated/compromised somehow?

    I dont know how long this comment will stay up,

    If you agree please post your views here with any suggestions as to what we can do….maybe set up our own website?”

    I suppose it would be a surprise if NSA/GCHQ didn’t do something after their embarrassment from Snowden’s revelations. I was really pleased to find this website and will do everything I can to draw Guardian readers attention to it. I urge everyone to do the same by surreptitiously posting a link to this site on every opportunity.

    Is it possible that the Graun has been infiltrated or compromised somehow by NSA/GCHQ?
    Are there any honest journalists left on the Guardian who might be prepared to spill the beans?
    Does anyone have any suggestions as to how we can unmask this takeover of our old Guardian?

    I expect this too is being monitored by NAS/GCHQ but WTF!

  4. ken says:

    I agree and am pleased to find this web site. We are not alone. I will do all I can to alert other Guardian readers to this website. Maybe its not too late.

  5. Yet another Ken says:

    A friend of mine has a close relative who works at the Guardian, so I hear rumours about what it’s like there. Apparently there is a climate of fear among reporters; at least one has lost their job for failing to toe the party line over a story concerning the Middle-East. (I assume it was Syria, judging by when it happened.)

    • ken says:

      This could be very important. Can you find out any more? Your friend seems to be the best lead we have so far. Do you think the journalist who has been sacked might be prepared to spill the beans?

  6. chris goodwin says:

    Little query, perhaps YOU can help. Many years ago there appeared an aerial photograph, courtesy of the USAF, of a nondescript cargo ship “steaming” in, well, water. Said to be Indian Ocean, and I’ll take their word for it, but could have been Caribbean, or Atlantic, or the Pacific… stop singing, please, it distracts me. This image appeared on the same day on the front page of the Guardian – and the Times – and the Daily Telegraph – with the same story attached: as I recall, it was an Iraqi ship, full of poison gas, enough to do TERRIBLE things to the WHOLE WORLD, so it could not be attacked, or boarded, or sunk, with a suicidal captain and crew ready to blow them selves, and presumably a lot of other “usses” to kingdom come. Be afraid, be very afraid. The US navy, however, was following them, so that was all right. In a submarine, very discreet. That just happened to have a photo reconnaissance aircraft on board. How convenient. All this long before there were such things as drones to be had. Then there was the second Bush/Gulf war, and then there was “Mission Accomplished” – but I never heard any more about this Chem Death Ship. But it must have been there, because I saw it in the papers. Honest ! (Or perhaps not ?)

    My question is, what happened to the ship ? Who owns it ? Who heroically decomtaminated or dismantled it ? Who subsequently assessed how dangerous it would in fact have been if the cowardly custard captain had actually done his duty, and pulled the trigger? I do not assiduously read every day’s paper, so maybe it was all there, but I have never seen it. Does the story exist ? Or is it just a story, like that told by the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador ?

    Just askin’

  7. […] Ukraine: A New Front (February 2014) […]

  8. Keith says:

    The Guardian now pre moderates all my posts on CIF because they didn’t like what i put out about the Ukraine. I found it scary because i can see the evil that is coming out of the west. Here’s one I doubt they will ever let me put out:


    And here’s another one: Obama’s War Policies Show a Pattern, by Eric Zeusse:

    • ken says:

      Hi Keith

      Good on you. Keep up the struggle. Our time will come.

      To avoid being pre-moderated, just set up another e-mail account under another name and then re-register on the guardian from that account. Every time they ban you or put you on their pre moderation censorship list just repeat the process. Works every time. Fuck them. Long live freedom!

      Best wishes,


      • Keith says:

        Thanks for the reply, Ken, I will try that. I never thought that The Guardian would cover up US and Neocon violence and fascism. Everything is in reverse, the good guys are the bad guys and the bad guys might not be quite as bad as they are painted out to be. The US champions democracy yet destroys democracy everywhere.

      • Keith says:

        I went under an alias but The Guardian seemed to find me out after three comments and locked me out and so I couldn’t sign back in. My style is lots of links to articles on the web with lots quotes/ extracts from them. In one Guardian article the Russian dissident Garry Kasparov said that Russia was a police state so I put out this article below. As you can see, this totally exposes western propaganda for what it is.

        US Police Have Killed Over 5,000 Civilians Since 9/11

        Statistically speaking, Americans should be more fearful of the local cops than “terrorists.”

        By Katie Rucke @katierucke | November 6, 2013

    • grandchester says:

      me too unfortunately
      I find it very disturbing

      • ken says:

        I have the same problem regularly. So far I’ve had to assume about 15 or so alternative aliases to keep posting on their threads ( why do I bother? I like the challenge!). I am certain now that the Guardian with their new Scott Trust Limited (the new Board is packed full of Bankers FFS) have some financial links with NATO, CIA, Saudi etc or their front orgs and their new east network is the most blatant, regularly hosting the old CIA funded outlet Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty that now calls itself RFE/RL and which is now directly funded by the US government with Kerry on the Board. Some of the worst presstitutes are Luke Harding covering Russia and Ukraine and Black covering the middle east.

        Go to and set up an innocent looking alias account and use that to set up your Guardian account. For the first few posts, when they are watching you, dont be too controversial…then let rip!!With luck you can post 50 or more times before they catch you. In my next alias I’ll try putting the nos 27 in my visible name. I thought if we all did that we could recognise each other and say hi. But it may not work if they are monitoring this site. Anyway keep up the fight! Victory will be ours!

      • Kavy says:

        The Guardian CIF section is full of raging right wingers who don’t get much of a challenge from the left.. I first lot this down to the left being mainly Liberals who have a tendency to be polite. Well, I went in for the kill, and I would post extracts from other sites and give links to prove my points. As I was so passionate I was knocking out my foes, except the Guardian started removing my posts, and then eventually I got pre moderated. This made me toothless and I could only be a little bit critical. Then I found sites like this and Offguardian and then I realised what was happening, most of the left were being were having their posts removed or were being pre moderated.

        I had bought the Guardian all my life. I even supported the paper by buying it when though I could read it online. Eventually I bought a kindle and then I got the kindle version of the guardian. It was a bargain and I was still supporting the paper. But when I realised that the Guardian was just really a propaganda sheet to deflect the left I stoped buying the kindle Guardian. I have a few aliases too, but I hardly ever bother with the Guardian now..

      • ken says:

        Thanks for that and I’ll check out offGuardian. I first got involved in commenting when the Graun was pushing the NATO narrative during the war in Ukraine and even lying on behalf of neo-NAZI scum like the AZOV battalion. It all went downhill I think when the Scott Trust was replaced by the very different and cynically named right wing Scott Trust Ltd. They are losing money big time and I am certain that they are now at least partially funded by CIA, NATO or some other front org.
        We really need an international grass roots left wing site, with pieces from all the different news sources, but with a good framework for comments like the Guardian, but more open. We certainly need something in this age of Corbyn and Sanders as an alternative to todays right wing near monopoly. What do you think?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s