World Cup 2018: Information War against Russia, Game ON!!

In less than a year, Russia will host the 21st FIFA World Cup. The eyes of the world will be upon Russia.

So, what’s the western media of the world doing? Of course, long before the first whistle is even blown, they’re sticking the boot right into Russia:

July of 2017 has the New York Post blaring:  FIFA’s rewarding bad actors by letting Russia and Qatar host World Cups, in an article which goes on to tear into Russia from every conceivable angle.

Screenshot (2714)The same month has the Economist blasting: The cost overruns on Russia’s World Cup stadiums are staggering – They have become a symbol of corruption under Putin’s rule

That article goes on to similarly rip into Russia, including the line ‘Western newspapers report that the builders made extensive use of forced labour by North Korean workers.’ Well, that’s authoritive then, ‘western newspapers’.

March had the Sun coming out withTHUG ARMY  Russian footie hooligan ringleaders warn England fans could be KILLED at Russia 2018 World Cup after Euro 2016 violence

One gang leader reportedly warned: “You think it was bad in France – wait until Russia. This is our home fixture”

The Daily Mail joined the offensive with‘If you thought France was bad, wait until the World Cup’: Russian football ultras warn England fans they could be KILLED at 2018 tournament in a repeat of Marseille violence last summer.

Screenshot (1302)What’s the UK government’s position on the World Cup 2018, by the way? Well, we can discern that by looking at the documentary the BBC came out with in February about the ‘secret world of Russia football hooligans‘, and all the predictable ‘scary men in masks’ that went with that, and a raft of other articles on the theme. The Sun carry the party line forward with their article of the other day based on a convenient ‘freedom of information request, to the Foreign Office’. HARD SELL – Chiefs at the Foreign Office believe the 2018 Russian World Cup will flop because of the country’s football yobs

There’s always doping to fall back on, of course, as in June we read: The drug squad: The Mail on Sunday reveals every member of Russia’s World Cup team is under investigation in a doping probe that shames football

That this claim was actually branded as ‘nonsense’ is something the western media weren’t quite so keen to impart.

But if, piercing this wall of negativity, some positive perceptions about Russia, or Russia western mediaRussia’s hosting of the World Cup 2018 may penetrate, there’s to stamp that out is the fall-back (Daily Mail, June 2017): Russia is ready for the World Cup that it desperately can’t afford – £20bn has been spent but there are still pitfalls

Ie, a western journalist goes to Russia, takes a few photos of things in a poor state, and frames it all in the context of ‘so, ok, the World Cup may be ok, but all the money spent on the stadiums means the rest of the country’s in ‘crisis’.

In the western media, the result of the World Cup in Russia, 2018, has already been decided – a home loss. And they’re going to do everything possible to make sure that comes to pass…

The Sunday Times today: How they Faked News: Exclusive

A little while ago, I was contacted by the Sunday Times to give comments on my involvement in the Anna Ziuzina / Barry Pring case. I don’t trust the Sunday Times, or their ‘journalist’ James Gillespie – just a standard western prostitute of the press, and it was clear they had already decided the narrative of their article.

I was sure that Gillespie (pictured) would simply take the parts of my answers which suited his pre-set script, so this is how I replied – we’ll have a look at it, then the Sunday Times fake news.

My reply in full: 

Thanks James, sorry I was just busy and didn’t get around to it, am out of the country now in any case. Let me answer these for you – please either publish my answers to all your questions, in full, or do not include or mention me in your article at all. If you edit or abridge any of my answers below, you will accept a claim of £100,000 damages against the Sunday Times for misrepresentation, and defamation of character. I will donate this all to a children’s home in Lutugino, Donbass.

Just to be clear, James – your publishing anything apart from everything I have written to you below accepts liability from Sunday Times to pay £100,000 to a children’s home in Lutugino, Donbass – of which I will give you full details. I will not benefit from this transaction in any way, the funds will be transferred directly to the children’s home.

All my answers are below. If you misrepresent me, I will publish them in full, for public record, in addition to the above damages.

On 27 July 2017 at 22:51, Gillespie, James;james.gillespie@sunday-times.co.uk>

Hi Graham,

Sorry we haven’t been able to speak, I guess you’re busy.
I’m writing a piece for the paper on Sunday about the Barry Pring inquest, specifically focussing on how flawed the hearing was. As you know the verdict was quashed in the High Court and a new inquest ordered.

It’s a bit strange you’re writing this six months after the event. And you are leading with a deliberately biased narrative. Who has paid you to write this? It sounds a lot like the narrative the Ziuzina family pay their lawyers and representatives to circulate…

Part of the reason for this finding was that the coroner had allowed “hearsay evidence” including your written and verbal accounts.
I just wanted to give you the chance to have your say about those findings.
Do you accept that the material you gave was “hearsay” and not based on proven facts?

My evidence was absolutely based on proven facts. The coroner’s ‘quashing’ of the verdict itself contained several significant errors and untruths, which I set out in a letter of the time. The ‘quashing’ shows that the British justice system is entirely flawed – this case was quashed because it was inconvenient for UK-Ukraine relations. And you can call my evidence ‘hearsay’, but not one part of it was disproved, whereas I disproved the entire basis for the ‘quashing’, in my document of the time.

What evidence do you have for your claims that Ganna Ziuzina was involved in her husband’s death?

The evidence presented in my 58-page report, fulsomely praised by the coroner at the time, after she had been in possession of it for around 4 years, and studied it extensively in that time. Yet in one month, something suddenly happened to change that, and then it was ‘hearsay’. The coroner’s verdict, concrete at the time, was clearly compromised by external UK ‘interests’.

Why has your book on the case been withdrawn from sale?

Because Amazon do withdraw books when they are aggressively threatened by expensive lawyers, as Ziuzina did here.

Do you maintain that the evidence you gave to the inquest was true and accurate?

You’re repeating yourself here, all answered above. In any case, absolutely true and accurate.

Do you accept that you are known as an opponent of the Ukrainian government?

I’m an opponent of anyone who tells lies.

Will you seek to give evidence at any future inquest into Mr Pring’s death?
What kind of facile, wantonly (trying to be) provocative questions are these? If I’m asked by the coroner, I’l (sic) give evidence. If not, then I won’t. There isn’t an ‘open questions’ part of an inquest…
The Anna Ziuzina / Barry Pring inquest verdict was overturned because it was inconvenient for the UK government’s position on Ukraine. Look out for my further videos and reportage on the theme, all entirely factual, truthful, accurate, as all my work.
 

Best, Graham

Sunday Times today: (my comments in bold)

Crucially, the coroner admitted she had not realised there was an alleged commercial interest of a “witness who provided hearsay evidence”, a reference to Graham Phillips, 38, a vlogger — video blogger — who described himself at the inquest as an “investigative journalist” and who had written a book on the case.

So the Sunday Times have clearly just picked a term to belittle me ‘vlogger’, and the second is just a lie – I didn’t describe myself as an ‘investigative journalist’ at the inquest, the coroner herself did. (I describe myself as always, a journalist.)

The book has been withdrawn from sale after legal warnings of defamation but the material formed a central part of the evidence at the inquest.

There is also another element to Phillips’s work. He often reports on the Russian-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine and is known for his pro-Russian views and opposition to Ukrainian authorities.

The BBC reported last week that from 2014 to 2015 Phillips was employed by Zvezda, a media channel run by the Russian defence ministry, and freelanced for the state-operated television network RT.

Again, the Sunday Times just selecting perceived negative aspects of my work to attack me. Any chance of something neutral to form a balanced picture? Of course not – this is a hit piece, just like the BBC’s was. 

In May 2014 Phillips was banned from entering Ukraine for three years on the grounds of “national security”. The Ukrainian government even took the unusual step of issuing an open letter to the UK condemning Phillips’s actions.

Just more negative about me, just in case you may have entertained any other notion, going into the ‘business part’. 

Apart from her lack of knowledge about Phillips’s activities, Earland also admitted she did not realise that hailing private cars in Ukraine rather than booking a taxi was a regular sight in the location where Pring was killed.

“Both strands of evidence are material and relevant and raise the potential of a different inquest conclusion being reached,” court documents record.

So you mean the coroner has claimed, or the Sunday Times are claiming, that in the 9 years the coroner had to work on this case, she didn’t do one Google search about me? A Google search would have thrown up all of the above negatives of the Sunday Times, because that’s what the western press do – write negative things about me, to attempt to discredit my work, because it doesn’t fit their narrative.

However, the coroner would have also found some ‘non-negative’ information – that I’m the journalist who has reported on the Ukraine crisis, then war in Donbass from the start. Thousands of videos, real reportage from the scene, first to the scene, risking my life to bring the truth, showing both sides.

And there are entire parts of my work which have nothing to do with ‘Ukraine’, for example my extensive Brexit reportage.

As for the nonsense about ‘hailing private cars’ I wrote of that yesterday even.Ziuzina with her new husband Ivan Lister, a Briton. She is now living in Spain

Which is exactly what Ziuzina wants. She is now living with a new husband, British businessman Ivan Lister, 48, in Spain and uses the name Julianne Moore.

“Despite the fact that I was the only witness to what happened, I was not told about the hearing,” she said in a Ukrainian newspaper. She also said reports that she had refused to give evidence were a lie and “the main witness of my ‘accusation’ was the famous pro-Russian propagandist and blogger Graham Phillips”.

She added: “For me, the death of my husband was a tremendous shock. Twice I went to a psychiatric hospital. Then there was a long way to rehabilitation, including being on antidepressants.”

Asked if she knew what had happened, she replied: “Whether he had enemies, I do not know. I can only say one thing: I am not involved in the death of Barry.”

All of this, of course Ziuzina’s side, sympathetic photo of her (but a key detail, see below), and having a go at me again. 

Phillips is still convinced she was involved. Approached by The Sunday Times, he accused the newspaper of being biased and said: “Who has paid you to write this?” He demanded £100,000 if all his answers to questions were not published in full, saying he would donate the money to a children’s home in Ukraine.

As above, I did indeed ‘demand’ £100,000, as above, to help the children’s home in Lutugino, Donbass, which I have been helping for a long time. I knew the Sunday Times would lie, as they indeed did, so wanted to give the opportunity that something good may come from their deceit. 

“My evidence was absolutely based on proven facts. The . . . ‘quashing’ of the verdict itself contained several significant errors and untruths . . . The ‘quashing’ shows that the British justice system is entirely flawed — this case was quashed because it was inconvenient for UK-Ukraine relations.”

Ok, so here’s what they’ve missed out from my answers, in bold: 

It’s a bit strange you’re writing this six months after the event. And you are leading with a deliberately biased narrative. Who has paid you to write this? It sounds a lot like the narrative the Ziuzina family pay their lawyers and representatives to circulate…

My evidence was absolutely based on proven facts. The coroner’s ‘quashing’ of the verdict itself contained several significant errors and untruths, which I set out in a letter of the time. The ‘quashing’ shows that the British justice system is entirely flawed – this case was quashed because it was inconvenient for UK-Ukraine relations. And you can call my evidence ‘hearsay’, but not one part of it was disproved, whereas I disproved the entire basis for the ‘quashing’, in my document of the time.

He said his book had been withdrawn for sale on Amazon because the website had been “aggressively threatened by expensive lawyers” and accused this newspaper of asking “facile, wantonly (trying to be) provocative questions”.

And so what else been missed out? A lot. It was a Sunday Times ‘pick n’ mix’ of what suited them. Nowhere to be seen, my answer to the question about my being an ‘opponent of the Ukrainian government’ –

I’m an opponent of anyone who tells lies.

Other answers, they’ve picked and chosen from, but they’ve completely ommitted all of this –

The evidence presented in my 58-page report, fulsomely praised by the coroner at the time, after she had been in possession of it for around 4 years, and studied it extensively in that time. Yet in one month, something suddenly happened to change that, and then it was ‘hearsay’. The coroner’s verdict, concrete at the time, was clearly compromised by external UK ‘interests’. 

When told The Sunday Times could not agree to his demand for £100,000 Phillips said he withdrew his comments.

The Sunday Times lawyer, Kirsty Howarth, had contacted me:

Your email exchanges with James Gillespie have been passed on to me. Your comments will be taken into account and fairly represented in any article.  They will not be published in full and there is no basis for any suggestion that The Sunday Times would then have to pay £100,000.

And I’d replied: 

I gave my comments exclusively on the basis they would be published in full. If not, I revoke all permission to use them, and the Sunday Times will therefore accept my claim for liability, defamation, misrepresentation, as previously stated, if they use part of them, incurring the stated amount, a charitable donation for Donbass.

Graham

And we go from there. Lies, fake news, misrepresentation from the Sunday Times, as I knew it would be. I wrote on the theme yesterday here. 


And an absolutely key point here: 
A spokesman for the chief coroner said: “The High Court has ordered that the chief coroner should arrange for the fresh inquest to be heard by a different coroner.” Earland and Ziuzina declined to comment.

So they didn’t even have an interview with Ziuzina?? They just republished her remarks from a months-old interview in Ukrainian media?? All her comments are taken from this interview, April 1st… 

So, a months-old interview with Ziuzina dug up, dressed up as ‘journalism’ in the Sunday Times, to further aid the UK government’s position (that it all just goes away so as not to cause problems), and adds to the recent attacks on me by UK media…. welcome to the world of our ‘great British press’…

I’ll look at the legal options to see if this time, something good may come out of more Sunday Times lies and fake news.

A Graham Newsletter (#33) Pressure in the UK, Ukraine, and Leaving the UK

For the past couple of weeks, as you may know, I’ve been back in the UK, and have felt some pressure from the authorities in this time here. The conviction and imprisonment of Ben Stimson was framed around his being pictured ‘holding a weapon’ in Donbass, something the FCO have written to me about in the past. And further, they moved on from that by updating their travel guidance to add the threat that those who ‘assist those in the conflict’ in Donbass may be liable to prosecution in the UK.

I’ve written about all of that here – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/22/exclusive-how-the-uk-are-trying-to-stop-my-work-full-story/

So, what to expect as I leave the UK in a few hours? Well, of course I hope to normally pass through the border, with no issues. Journalism isn’t a crime, after all, even if the government don’t like it. However, what also happened in my time back here is that the BBC came after me to try to blur the lines, insinuate that I’d crossed journalistic lines. Here’s my response to that:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/24/bbc-hit-piece-my-response-to-it/

So what could the UK do against me? Jail me, like Ben? Unlikely they’d dare to go that far. Take my passport? They’d surely like to do that – either to stop me leaving the country, or force me into a position of applying for the passport of another country, i.e. Russia so they could discredit my work with ‘Russian propagandist’ etc. Not that that would or ever could be the case. I’m British, and actually consider myself a true patriot of the UK – in as much as I’d rather go against my country until it becomes the country I was brought up to believe in. For the moment, it’s hard to believe in anything the UK government do, and I’ve covered that on the Truth Speaker –

How the UK Got it So Wrong on Euromaidan, and Ukraine

Why is the UK supporting Ukraine so much? 3 Explanations…

I will keep challenging the narrative of the UK government as long as they continue acting in an entirely deceitful, immoral way. The next period of work is a hugely important one, and I’m ready for it. I’m pleased to have received my Russian visa, writing of that here:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/25/new-russian-visa-leaving-the-uk-back-to-work-and-uk-fyi/

That, with your support, setting me up for the next year of work in Russia, of course not only. And, if the UK do try to prevent that in any way, they will have their own words to fall on, which they well indeed now wish to take back in light of their recent Ukraine escalation, from September 2016 that:

“Mr. Phillips did not commit an offense in Great Britain that could be a reason for the British government to make him forbidden to leave the country.”

Those by UK ambassador to Ukraine Judith Gough, by the way, and I’ve written of her here. And that came after my interview with Ukrainian POW (shortly before exchange), Vladimir Zhemchugov, and here’s my position on that:

My Interview with Ukrainian Terrorist Vladimir Zhemchugov: My Statement

Of course, the sensible thing for the UK to do would be to let me leave the country without any problems, warnings, questioning etc. Last time I left in March, it was 30 minutes of fairly standard questioning at Harwich. However even that shouldn’t be the case – I’m a working journalist, keen to get back to work, to do my job, to bring you reportage. I don’t like fuss, or scandal, just – reporting facts. That they don’t reconcile with the UK government’s version in no way impacts on my right to report them. 

If you’re sleeping now, and read this later, I hope this finds you well, and my having left for the next period of work, which will incidentally encompass the completion of my documentary from Belval, Luxembourg, (pictured) about which I’m very excited, and onto Russia, and more!

I hope to return, before too long, to a better Britain…

Why the BBC Have Come After Me…

The UK’s position on the Ukraine situation has been becoming increasingly aggressive:

The imprisonment of Ben Stimson:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/18/rank-injustice-hypocrisy-in-the-uk-the-case-of-ben-stimson-and-chris-garrett/

Increasing their support of the Ukrainian military: 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/21/united-kingdom-steps-up-support-of-ukrainian-army-still-shelling-civilians/

The case of Ben Stimson was a link up between the BBC and the UK government, with the BBC stitching Ben up – 

… and the government locking him up. 

That was the 11th, on the 17th, I got this email from the BBC (screenshots pictured).

Hi Graham,

My name’s Sam Bright – I work for the BBC in London.

I’m currently writing a story for BBC Trending about the work of individuals such as Patrick Lancaster, Russell Bentley and yourself in eastern Ukraine.

We would obviously be interested in speaking to you for this story, to hear your views. We would like to ask you generally about your experiences, and about how you use the internet to fund your work and spread your message.

Let me know if this would be possible. I look forward to hearing from you.

Many thanks,

Sam Bright

I replied:

Sam,

No offence to you personally, as I don’t know you, and you may be a nice guy, but the BBC are a shower of despicable, disgraceful, disgraced propagandists, not to be trusted in any circumstances. And so my response would be something like: shame on you bunch of lying, propagandising scoundrels for bringing journalism into disrepute, and my country into disrepute. Where are your morals, ethics, or integrity? How can you be so entirely dishonest in your coverage, and reportage? It’s rank deceit.

The BBC is fake news, outright lies, and I’m having absolutely no part of your odious operation, in any way. Actually, you disgust me. I always work to report the truth – that means I work against the BBC, who work to twist, and distort the truth, at every turn.

I think that covers it for now,

Graham

On the 20th, Sam replied: 

Hi Graham,

We’re planning to run a story on the BBC News website about your crowdfunding and activities in eastern Ukraine.

Specifically we’re reporting that since November 2013, you have been covering the conflict and that you were formerly employed by Zvezda. We are reporting that you have been banned from entering Ukraine on the grounds of national security and that the Ukrainian government has issued an open letter to the UK authorities condemning your activities.

We are also noting that you say you have financed your activities entirely through crowdfunding from January 2016, and that you have raised roughly £7,000 through crowdfunding websites since that time.

We are reporting that you have frequently travelled to Donbass, despite your travel ban. We are also noting that the site JustGiving removed one of your appeals in July 2015, because of your defiance of the travel ban. We are reporting that you have been filmed navigating a drone with the help of soldiers in Donbass and have interviewed Ukrainian prisoners of war.

If you have any comment on the above or would like to reconsider the possibility of an interview, please let me know.

Sam Bright
Reporter | BBC

So, it’s clear what line the BBC are going to take – that I ‘worked for Russian military tv channel Zvezda‘ – I did, briefly, at the end of 2014, start of 15. They gave me freedom as a correspondent (pictured in a Zvezda piece), I did my own thing, sent my pieces to them, had contact only with producers there, like any channel. Yet, still, I made the decision to end my working arrangement with them, and since March 2015, have been fully independent, worked only for myself.

Will the BBC cover this? They will, but they are clearly going to make out that I’ve only raised £7000 via crowdfunding, clearly that doesn’t cover costs, there must be some sort of shadowy, Russian sponsor etc…. the truth is much more prosaic, that I’ve raised a bit more via my Paypal, and individual donations, but actually I live modestly, and yeah, it is a sometimes a struggle to get by. But, that’s the life I’ve chosen, and I accept it.

Be sure that the BBC journalist penning the hatchet piece about me from an office in London is surely earning much more than myself, and will make no mention that I’ve sacrificed an apartment in Odessa, any number of material comforts offered by working for channels, to go it alone, and dedicate my life to reporting the truth. There will be nothing about the hundreds of videos I’ve made giving those in Donbass a voice, being first at the scene where no other western correspondents were, the many documentary films

No, it’s going to be that I’ve frequently ‘returned to Donbass while being banned from there’, that I’m some sort of a ‘risk to Ukrainian national security’, and the flying a drone with the help of soldiers, interviewing Ukrainian prisoners of war. As for the drone, I did fly that with members of the people’s militia around, and they could hardly not be, given that it was positions. And indeed, as I’ve been completely open about, as with everything – they advised me on where would be most interesting to fly it. And, really, so what?

And the interviewing Ukrainian prisoners of war – sure, I’ve done that a lot of times. But, Ukrainian forces have taken me captive twice, interviewed me at gunpoint, put a bag over my head for a day, kept me in a darkened room without food or water.  Not to mention stolen a great deal of my possessions. So, I earned my right to interview Ukrainian POWs the hard way, and actually, I always stay within reasonable boundaries.

But, all of that will be put forward to make me out to be some sort of a bad guy. No mention of the tens of thousands I’ve raised for humanitarian work in Donbass, the ongoing support of the children’s home in Lutugino, for example. And the rest, that I’m some sort of Russian spy, propagandist etc. Not mentioning that I’ve often spoken of not liking the RT channel, after how they treated me, and ended my own contract with Zvezda. And am, of course, British, with no connection at all to Russia, other than that it’s a country I’m interested in, like, like doing reportage from – as others, Serbia, for example.

So, why did I refuse to speak to the BBC, as some have asked? Because the story they have decided to write is pre-determined. Anything I say to them would only be turned around and used against me, and more, I would be complicit, thus compromised, in their hit piece on me, which all leads to the question – why are they doing it?

Clearly, the BBC have been tasked to do a hit piece on me, to set public opinion against me, so that if the UK government do try to take steps against me, there won’t be any public uproar, or outcry – as there wasn’t with Ben.

But, it’s a clumsy attempt from them, and it’s not going to work. However the fact they even tried it shows which way the wind is blowing in the UK.

I replied to Sam:

Samuel, again, this is not personal because I don’t know you, but the BBC are not to be trusted in any way. I’ve seen many times the deceit, and propaganda the BBC have, and do, perpetuate.

I’m not going to be any part of it.

So, it’s a no, and will always be that way. It is your right to reprint parts of these emails I have sent you. But, that’s it. I stand for honest, truthful journalism, of integrity. The BBC is fake news, lies, propaganda.

Regards, Graham

So, it’s their move now. But, I’m ready for them. Bring it on!

A Graham Newsletter (#31) Russophobes at Cambridge – Fake Research, Buzzfeed – Fake News – Mariupol Adventures, and More!

Ever wonder why the mood, on an official level, from the UK is so entrenched, endemic anti-Russian? Could it be that public figures in the UK are being conditioned, from a young age? Have a look at my new video!

And here on the Truth Speaker – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/03/cambridge-university-fake-research-rory-finnin-anti-russia-propaganda/

But it’s not all bad news from the UK, British photographer Dean O-Brien recently visited the city of Mariupol, and did a good job of work there – read more about that here –

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/07/the-adventures-of-a-british-freelance-photographer-in-mariupol/

Mariupol still shows signs of anti pro-Ukrainian feelings amongst the population

A post shared by Dean O'Brien (@deanobeano1) on

Speaking of visits, a French delegation recently visited Donetsk, I covered that, here – 

And here – 

With more, plus encore, to come, on that!

I was pleased to present my new film from Donbass, with full English subtitles!

And having earlier had a look at fake research, from Cambridge, here a look at fake news, from Buzzfeed –

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/04/mariupol-myself-and-buzzfeed-fake-news/

To real news, I brought you breaking updates from Donbass, with video – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/07/terrorist-attacks-strike-lugansk-today-full-details/

And special reportage from the war-torn village of Nikishino – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/03/nikishino-special-reportage-from-a-donbass-forgotten-village/

And more real news, debunking of fake news, coming up soon! Thanks for being with me, Graham

Mariupol, Myself and Buzzfeed Fake News

In May of 2014, Buzzfeed wrote an article about me – https://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/how-a-british-blogger-became-an-unlikely-star-of-the-ukraine?utm_term=.fcpgVZ7AD#.myRGd7Yyk – I wrote about my reaction to it here, in early 2015 – because basically, I’d been done over.

However, there were a few factors to take into account at the time – I was extremely busy working, on the scene, in Donbass, and the article was just ‘one of these things’, one of a number of articles written to try to take me down.

Also, a strong reaction from my side would have simply seen Buzzfeed go for me more, and I actually felt that the long phone calls I’d had with Max Seddon has somewhat taken the edge off what Buzzfeed really wanted to do – a full takedown. (Photo from article, here)

However, it’s an article people, who want to have a go at me, bring up even now as a first offering to ‘slap me down’. It shows up high in the google rankings. So, here, in a few points, I’ll go through what was clear fake news by Buzzfeed, before people even really used that term.

Mariupol, May 2014 (after shooting on May 9th)

Buzzfeed fake: But how many people were killed? Local news reported two deaths. Ukraine’s interior minister said 21 people died in the fighting. Human Rights Watch could only confirm seven deaths after visiting all four hospitals where the wounded were taken.

None of that seemed right to Graham Phillips, a roving Ukraine-based British blogger who films guerrilla field reports from the conflict’s hot spots for his own YouTube channel and has become a growing star on Kremlin-owned media. So he set out to investigate in the way that has made him a cult micro-celebrity in east Ukraine’s crisis: by interviewing angry people on the street for 90 seconds at a time.

Some people told him that more than 100 people had died in the fighting.

Reality: Actually, I was committed to finding out how many people had really been killed on May 9th. Indeed, I interviewed some locals who told me that the figure was 100 – and I put those interviews up unedited, as with all my interviews –

And what issue do Buzzfeed have with putting up unedited interviews with locals, from the scene? In any case, this was just a part of my Mariupol reportage, I wanted to cover every side, even interviewing Ukrainian soldiers about what happened –

I explored all over the police station, at the centre of events on May 9th, just 2 of those videos here –

I interviewed people on the scene there – 

More, from a local I obtained real, first-hand events on May 9th – just some of those videos here – 

More, I visited city morgues, several times, to confirm the number – 

I questioned those who had told me the figure of ‘100’ – 

So, to another, Buzzfeed fake:  In Phillips’ version of events, Ukraine’s army was eager to cover up the massacre and so it bypassed morgues and hospitals and hid the bodies in the woods. Relatives of the dead were too terrified of reprisals to claim them missing, he said. Phillips’ interlocutors, whom he described as “well-informed local sources,” provided no evidence for these claims. He has yet to corroborate them. Nonetheless, Phillips soon appeared on Russian television promoting the unverified figure of 100 dead.

Reality: This was never my ‘version of events’. I simply uploaded videos of what people on the scene had said. And as for my ‘going on Russian television to promote the unverified figure‘, that’s just an outright lie. Here you can see me on RT at the time – 

From 1:27, I say ‘The official figure killed is 9, the Ukrainian figure is 21, some say much more.’

What happened next? I continued going to Mariupol to confirm figures – here, just one morgue confirmed 11 dead –

I carried on investigating in Mariupol until Ukrainian forces seized me, and deported me from there, on May 20th, 2014 –

And that’s reality for you, versus Buzzfeed fake news. 

Crimea, Russia and to Rage against the UK Propaganda Machine

Graham Phillips

I’ve been back in the UK for over a month now, and in that time, I’ve come to understand a few things better, especially the meaning of Orwell’s phrase that the future is ‘a boot stamping on a human face forever’.

But that’s hardly where the Orwell references end. Because in the UK it’s works a truly Orwellian-style propaganda machine, designed to keep the populace in eternal suspension of the purported threat of, of course – Russia! 

There’s Boris Johnson over in Kiev, churning out an incessant slew of anti-Russian rhetoric, without any substance to back it up, but because it’s anti-Russian, it’ll naturally be accepted unquestioned:

screenshot-1215

What we do have, of course, is Boris meeting ‘Crimean Tatars’ and condemning Russia’s ‘illegal annexation‘ of Crimea…

screenshot-1307Yet this provided without any context whatsoever. Russia’s ‘illegal annexation‘ of Crimea came about after a referendum there, which came about after a violent overthrow of government in Ukraine, Euromaidan. Yet, Euromaidan is exalted in the UK, events at eminent establishments are held in its honour, and dissenting from the narrative is not condoned –

Euromaidan is so important because the whole house of cards rests on it. It must be purported that Euromaidan was good. Because then it can be sustained that Crimea, and Donbass, are ‘bad’, and ‘Russian aggression’. And the situation in Crimea must be made out to be ‘bad’ (as it always is), with particular focus on the Crimean Tatars and their supposed repression.

In the above Crimean Tatar photo, it looks like Crimean Tatar figure Mustafa Dzhemilev, self-appointed ‘leader of Crimean Tatars‘, who supported Euromaidan tatarsin Crimea, left in 2014 for Kiev, and has provided an endless source for western media of reports of repression, persecution etc against Crimean Tatars in Crimea, despite himself not having been there for some 3 years now.

In Crimea, some are puzzled why Dzhemilev has never attempted to return to the peninsula, most accept that he has found a lucrative stream in Kiev, endlessly reciting how ‘repressed’ his people are, to eager audiences who ensure he is well remunerated for his suffering.

Yet in Crimea, Dzhemilev is regarded by most Crimean Tatars as a traitor to his own people:

And, as here, my reportage, while you can find Crimean Tatars who will tell you they preferred life under Ukraine, they are in the minority, and more, feel free to express that opinion:

But, none of this must be allowed to reach mainstream media. There, it can only be a wall of ‘blame Russia’, that’s become so much of a meme the Russian Embassy in the UK regularly joke about it –

screenshot-1310

What are the Ukrainian Embassy doing, meanwhile? Pumping out a relentless stream of tweets blaming Russia for everything…

screenshot-990screenshot-1258
screenshot-1264screenshot-1252And they are fully supported by the UK in doing this, the UK’s own embassy ever happy to tweet, retweet anything, as long as it’s pro-Ukrainian, and by default, anti-Russian. Ukraine really is an incredibly convenient country for those looking for a stick with which to beat Russia, so much so that all are willing to turn a blind eye to the manifest problems with, and in, Ukraine –

And when it’s not Ukraine, there’s always a subculture of Russia which can be passed off as Russia, look at Reggie Yates’ recent ‘yoof’ style series on BBC, Extreme Russia, simply a chance to go round exposing all that’s bad about the country, safe in the knowledge that no one over here will either disagree, or seek to present the other side.

So, that’s the reality as we have it, walls, and waves of anti-Russian propaganda. And nowhere’s safe, not even sport, this is how the BBC are portraying the upcoming World Cup in Russia:

screenshot-1302

Of course there are those in the UK who can see behind the lies, and the masks, to the truth. But you have to really want to. You are faced with a colossal propaganda machine in the UK, to lie down is to let it simply stamp all over you. To stand against it, you have to be be prepared to, as things are now, stand almost alone.