The Presstitute Beat: Elizabeth Palmer’s Russian Gyrations

pale blue horiztgp-eye-on-media
By the constant administration of lies, the media puppeteers manufacture wars, protect the super-wealthy,
and destroy democracy.


PATRICE GREANVILLE

CBS correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reported truthfully on the Crimean referendum in 2014, but in 2017 she’s selling nothing but lies. What made her repudiate her own prior eyewitness report? Take a wild guess.

In a new report, published Jan. 9, 2017, in the midst of the greatest baseless anti-Russian hysteria in decades, Palmer is conveniently oblivious to her own facts. When the NATO commanders talk about the advisability of “a little more deterrence” against a Russia aggression that no one has ever documented, she fails to ask the good officer, “Why?” Playing dumb, she simply lets the chance slip to ask the central question: Deterrence against what? Except for some cautionary mobilizations inside Russia provoked by America’s own grotesque and foolhardy provocations massing soldiers and equipment on her borders, and with Russia now encircled by Washington vassal states, Russia has done simply nothing to warrant talk about “aggression”, “invasions”, “takeovers”, and similar shopworn anti-communist, russophobic claptrap. Since the corporate press is so sanctimoniously obsessed about the danger to the health of the nation and American democracy represented by “Fake News”, isn’t it time they should at least have the decency to start the hunt by looking at themselves in the mirror?

—P.G


See below:

THIS WAS ELIZABETH PALMER THEN
Report #1: Filed by CBS in March, 2014. Not great, but at least mostly truthful.

Report #2 A similarly truthful report, but much better, filed about the same time (March-April 2014) by PressTV:


Report #3 Aired by CBS on Jan. 9, 2017.  A shameless compilation of innuendo and lies.

Below, the CBS transcript of the clip above. Our commentary is in the Comment panel; bolded in red is what we regard as deceitful, misleading or an outright lie buried in the text.


For 1st time since Cold War, U.S. tanks roll into Russia’s backyard

Last Updated Jan 9, 2017 7:20 AM EST

BREMERHAVEN, Germany — Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has been drawing down its military presence in Europe. But at the main docks in Bremerhaven, in northern Germany, that’s no longer the case. In fact, CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reports, quite the reverse is the order of the day.

All the massive hardware of a U.S. combat brigade arrived in Germany over the weekend, and started rolling east toward Poland, where 4,000 American soldiers will be waiting for it.

It is the first build-up of American troops and weapons in Europe in almost 30 years, and as Palmer reports, the impressive display of military might is meant, in large part, to reassure America’s nervous allies in Europe that the U.S. military will be there, standing with them, against any Russian aggression.

COMMENT: The old trope about “nervous allies needing reassurance” by Uncle Sam’s military muscle is one of the oldest self-serving and next to impossible to test statements used by US propagandists. This type of statement is usually introduced without attribution, but should the reporter or media be questioned, they can always say it is the opinion of any of numerous figures the CIA keep on tap for such “corroborations”. It could be some ranking military officer, cultural figure, political analyst or some paid politician. The trope reinforces in the American mind the idea that the US, as Obama never tires of saying, is “the indispensable nation”, and that “the world needs our leadership,” which is as ludicrous a declaration as you can find, but which endless unchallenged repetition has sanitized and made credible over time.

Aggression, and land grabs, like the 2014 invasion of Crimea, when Russian troops landed in what had been Ukraine and seized the ground for the Kremlin.

COMMENTThis is the Big Lulu here, as shown by the videos we attach. In 2o14 Palmer reported that 97% of the Crimean population had voted to rejoin the Russian Federation; in 2017 she is suddenly talking about “land grabs,” and “the invasion of Crimea.” What do you call this kind of person? And what about her bosses, the producers behind such scams? The criminal media barons behind it all? Common streetwalkers have a lot more honor than these people, and they are not nearly as dangerous. 

America’s response, manifested with the new deployment, has been to increase both its own force in Europe, and its support of NATO.

However, incoming U.S. President Donald Trump has suggested NATO is obsolete, and said he wants to restore good relations with Russia.

Palmer asked Major General Timothy McGuire how quickly the new president could, as a gesture of good will towards Russia, turn the whole deployment to eastern Europe around and pull them out.

“I’m not going to speculate on what the incoming president may or may not do, but I will tell you this is in the interests of the United States Army, to build readiness,” McGuire replied.

The new commander-in-chief could reverse it all, of course, but Palmer says that would take months, or even years.

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has already indicated that he views the American build-up as pointless.

It’s “stupid and unrealistic,” he said, to think that Russia would attack anyone. But the American military and its NATO allies believe a little extra deterrence won’t hurt.

Once all the troops and equipment of the combat brigade reach their final destinations, at various places in eastern Europe, they will start a series of big multinational exercises with other NATO armies.

The Kremlin said Monday that discussions would begin with Mr. Trump’s administration after his inauguration to determine a time for his first meeting with Putin.

The seat of Russian power also said it was looking forward to putting the current period of tension behind it, suggesting Mr. Trump would usher in “more sober experts.”

—END—


NOTE: ALL IMAGE CAPTIONS, PULL QUOTES AND COMMENTARY BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS

BAR-msm-media-lies

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
    Patrice Greanville is this website’s editor in chief.


Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey
=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary.  In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.  
[email-subscribers namefield=”YES” desc=”” group=”Public”]

bandido-balance75

Nauseated by the
vile corporate media?
Had enough of their lies, escapism,
omissions and relentless manipulation?

GET EVEN.
Send a donation to 

The Greanville Post–or
SHARE OUR ARTICLES WIDELY!
But be sure to support YOUR media.
If you don’t, who will?





horiz-black-wide

Share This:

2 thoughts on “The Presstitute Beat: Elizabeth Palmer’s Russian Gyrations

  1. Patrice writes: “The new commander-in-chief could reverse it all, of course, but Palmer says that would take months, or even years.”

    Who is Elizabeth Palmer? A CBS reporter. What does he know about what it would take for NATO to reverse itself? Not much. And if he does know, he doesn’t give facts, figures, and quotable sources.

    Feh!

    1. EDITOR REPLIES:
      The reader’s sentiment may be right but his comment packs some errors.
      (1) Elizabeth Palmer is obviously a woman, a SHE”, not a HE.
      (2) “Patrice” does not state “The new commander-in-chief could reverse it all, of course, but Palmer says that would take months, or even years.” CBS presstitute Palmer says that.

      As to the fact that Palmer does not give any facts to sustain the above statement, which, again, pours cold water on the possibility of peace (which suits Palmer’s employers’ viewpoint, as they are pushing for war), that is correct.

Comments are closed.