Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 14, 2007
Annals of Biased Reporting – The Guardian on Berezovsky

The Guardian writes about an official Brazilian request to Britain to extradite the Russian billionaire Berezovsky on money laundering charges. The billionaire, who made his fortune by likely illegal means during the corrupt rule of Boris Yeltsin, is also wanted by Russia for embezzling and for attempting to plot a coup.

In today’s report the Guardian writer includes this tiny gem:

The tycoon also faces potential prosecution in Russia over alleged calls for the government’s overthrow, stemming from an interview he gave earlier this year to the Guardian.

"Mr. Berezovsky’s alleged calls for the government’s overthrow" – hmmm.

A dictionary defines alleged as:

Represented as existing or as being as described but not so proved; supposed.

Let’s look at the record, the interview Mr. Berezovsky gave to the Guardian on April 13:

"We need to use force to change this regime," he said. "It isn’t possible to change this regime through democratic means. There can be no change without force, pressure." Asked if he was effectively fomenting a revolution, he said: "You are absolutely correct."
[…]
"There is no chance of regime change through democratic elections," he says. "If one part of the political elite disagrees with another part of the political elite – that is the only way in Russia to change the regime. I try to move that."

There is an audio clip available that includes the above words right out of Berezovsky’s mouth.

In light of the record, why does the writer characterize Berezovsky’s "calls for the government’s overthrow" as only "alleged"?

Comments

Damn b, you all over these prop-agenda journalist’s stenographers. Good work.
Speaking of et propagandhi, JC once again catches em in the act…
Vitter’s a Democrat???

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jul 14 2007 8:30 utc | 1

It’s alleged because Berezovsky has got ££££££ in the bank.
I heard something on the radio last night about the Brazilian football club Corinthians being pissed off because Berezovsky funded them and has now pulled out, the transfer of Carlos Teves from West Ham being one issue, having the Glazier family controlling Manchester United.

Posted by: Clomed Poster | Jul 14 2007 8:44 utc | 2

@Uncle – One needs to keep nitpicking on them – constantly. I think Glenn is right in this

As frustrating as it can be, this sort of day-to-day pressure on individual journalists and political figures is the most effective weapon possessed by blogs, websites and other organizations devoted to forcing into our public discourse various perspectives and narratives which are otherwise excluded.

Posted by: b | Jul 14 2007 8:45 utc | 3

1) 14 July 2007, 11:21 GMT
Russia suspends arms control pact.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has suspended the application of a key Cold War arms control treaties.
Mr Putin signed a decree citing “exceptional circumstances” affecting security as the reason for the move.
2)Dated Brent Spot US$79.64
Whats happening?

Posted by: curious | Jul 14 2007 12:04 utc | 4

Curious: Someone is sending a message not to mess with Iran?
Just an uneducated guess.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Jul 14 2007 12:40 utc | 5

curious # 4
Japan …
U.S. Helps Japan Deploy Missile Defense System

Even as efforts to erect a missile-defense system in Europe roil U.S. relations with Russia, Washington has quietly worked with Japan to deploy a costly defense network to protect major Japanese cities from a ballistic-missile barrage.
The missile-defense system ostensibly is designed to protect Japan from attack by North Korea, but legislators quietly acknowledge that China is the nation’s real concern.

Iran demands Japan’s oil payments in yen, not US dollars

Three big oil producing nations – Iran, Venezuela and Russia – have all been moving much of their foreign currency reserves from dollars to euros in recent months.
The latest move can only add to the long-term pressure on the dollar, already hit by worries about the US economy based on the crisis in the sub-prime mortgage market.

1 EUR = $1.3783
… between Iran and a hard place.

Posted by: Hamburger | Jul 14 2007 12:45 utc | 6

This recent exchange above on Russia, Japan, Iran is off topic in this thread, but needs a good hard look I think:
the indefatigable Elaine Meinel Supkis on the 2nd link in #6:

Iran’s letter demanding the Japanese buy oil only in yen is pure genius. You can bet, there are others involved in this situation, like a certain major oil pumping nation that demanded the US pull back those missiles being set up in Poland…?

Of course, like Europe with Russia, Japan could refuse to buy Iran’s oil. But then, a certain dragon will happily suck it down, anyway, and pay in rising yuan to boot. The US can’t allow this.

Russia has been examining plans to price the Urals oil export blend in rubles to curb currency risks. The nation plans to open the Energy Stock Exchange in St. Petersburg in the first half of next year to trade oil in rubles, UBS AG reported June 14.

From Bloomberg:
Crude oil rose to an 11-month high in New York and London after a pipeline shutdown and maintenance work reduced North Sea Brent oil production.

So, are stocks going to soar on this news? So far, reality has been fantasy there. This is pure lunacy. They thought the Japanese game of handing out free money as cover for them all making up money magically via loans, is now going to fall apart. As the Bank of Japan itself noted, 80% of its trade surplus this year was MONETARY due to the cheap yen versus all other currencies. Now watch this shrink magically!

So, curious, Bloomberg offers an account for the spike in Brent crude. As well, don’t forget: 100% energy dependent Japan is dependant on whose navy to protect those oil bearing boats?
I’m wondering why there is never any discussion readily seen on the interaction of war policy, oil production and FOREX reserves.
There was a pretty good discussion here at one point regarding Saddam’s intention to dump the petrodollar in favor of the petro-euro as a/the reason to invade Iraq.
It looks to me like the shift away from dollars cannot be stopped – even by the Bush-Saudis. What would it take – another war?

Posted by: Hamburger | Jul 14 2007 13:28 utc | 7

@Hamburger
“No matter what political reasons are given for war, the underlying reason is always economic.” – A. J. P. Taylor

Posted by: b | Jul 14 2007 16:45 utc | 8

b,
Thanks for the link. I like this part:

A recurring theme in [Taylor’s] writings was the role of accidents in deciding history. In his view, leaders did not make history; instead they reacted to events – what happened in the past was due to sequences of blunders and errors that were largely outside anyone’s control. To the extent that anyone made anything happen in history, it was only through their mistakes.

Appropos of: sequences of blunders and errors that were largely outside anyone’s control
Will Japan Destroy the Yen to Save the Dollar?”

… The Japanese are pursuing this reckless monetary policy with the deliberate goal of creating inflation, and they are in danger of succeeding beyond their wildest dreams. …
The question is why are they doing it?
The only logical answer I can offer is that the Japanese realize that if they stop the flow of global liquidity they will destroy the dollar and the U.S. economy. To survive, the U.S. must be able to both limitlessly exchange the dollars it prints for the goods the rest of the world makes and then pay low rates of interest on its IOU’s that foreigners accumulate as a result. Were the Japanese to turn off the monetary spigot and raise interest rates to normal levels, Americans would not be able to do either.
A real rate of interest on the yen would reverse the carry trade by creating demand for Japanese assets and diminishing demand for dollar denominated assets. Such a move would simultaneously send U.S. interest rates and consumer prices thought the roof and stock and real estate prices through the floor. The entire U.S. consumer economy would collapse and Americans would experience the greatest period of economic hardship since the Great Depression.
This scenario apparently terrifies the Japanese, as they fear that such a severe recession in American means similar problems for Japan. However, their fears are misplaced as their real problem is the enormous cost of trying to prevent this from happening. Their fixation on what might happen to Japan if the American economy were to run off the rails has blinded them to the far greater costs of trying to keep in on track.

So Iran’s demand that Japan pay for oil in yen rather than petrodollars could very well achieve the same results. Looks like Iran (whisper: and China) might be on to something here.

Posted by: Hamburger | Jul 14 2007 17:13 utc | 9

@Hamburger, regarding “There was a pretty good discussion here at one point regarding Saddam’s intention to dump the petrodollar in favor of the petro-euro as a/the reason to invade Iraq.”:
Iran converted 70 % of its forex reserves from $$$ to other currencies a year ago AND has established an oil commodities exchange to function in Euros. America is furious, and we Iranians believe a U.S. military attack on Iran would be aimed partly at disrupting Iran’s Dollar-unfriendly policies. Well, what do the idiots in the Bush Administration expect Iran to do when the U.S. Treasury officially declared its currency a Weapon of War and has banned all Dollar transactions with Iran???
There is now some real hard blowback from Russia on ALL fronts (legal, military and currency-related), and not a minute too soon.

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 14 2007 17:48 utc | 10

Parviz,
I had heard about the plans for the exchange, but never came across any confirmation that it was actually established. Do you have any links? In English? Also, what does/did 70% of FOREX $ reserves actually amount to? How many billions?
Thanks.

Posted by: Hamburger | Jul 14 2007 19:00 utc | 11

Not to take anything away from your criticism of the word alleged here, but should saying you want to overthrow the government be a crime?

Posted by: Tzombo | Jul 14 2007 23:28 utc | 12

should saying you want to overthrow the government be a crime?
i think we have something in our constitution about that. first and foremost we have freedom of speech, which allows us to express the desire, second we have the right to have militias just in case. i think…

Posted by: annie | Jul 15 2007 8:48 utc | 13

@annie While the amerikan constitution may talk about freedom of speech I for one don’t believe that amerika has had freedom of speech for many a long year. Setting aside the issue of the censorship of broadcast media where somehow it has been determined that the constitutional guarantee doesn’t apply, outta respect for B and the consequences he would suffer, believe it or not I bite my tongue in here from time to time.
The laws that have been passed ostensibly to protect the prez from threat or conspiracy to assassinate, would make an exchange about Bush and amerika like the one Berezovsky had about the Russian government and Putin open to harrassment and maybe prosecution.
‘Maybe’ because this sort of law is so grey and so discretionary that in most cases nothing would happen, but if for some reason someone decided that a certain blog was ‘problematic’, traces of actual threats against Bush or exhortations to violently overthrow the amerikan government would be used to close the blog down and if neccessary throw the blogger into chokey.
Maybe B wouldn’t cop that sort of reaction but imagine for a moment if George Soros fell out with the dems and began calling for the violent overthrow of the amerikan government. How long before he became a hunted man? Not very long I’d reckon. Of course it’s never going to happen Soros is no fool but anyone as rich and powerful as Berezovsky who called for the violent overthrow of the amerikan government would not last long.
Berezovsky is no ordinary blogger so the Russians have taken steps to let him know he needs to watch his back. The threats against the Guardian which in another life had been known to publish articles straight outta Politburo press releases ( eg an amazingly inventive piece ‘proving’ that the Korean airplane mistakenly shot down at the behest of a drunken Russian general was done so because an amerikan spyplane and satellite were hiding behind its radar shadow) are a reaction to British publicity about Berezovsky’s intelligence chief Alexander Litvinenko being murdered at the behest of Putin.
And we thought the Cold War was about ideology? That it continues with bugger all ideological difference puts that bullshit in the ground where it always belonged.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 15 2007 21:50 utc | 14

Please refer to my post 137 (Ominous signs of war) for more examples of propaganda (this time fortunately revealed by the LA Times)

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 16 2007 9:56 utc | 15

well said debs. nonetheless, i don’t think it should be a crime to speak your mind whatever it is, which is different from threating to do it and i think the constitution backs me up on this. however, our constitution means less and less these days. had the question been ‘is it a crime?’ instead of ‘should it be?’ i would have answered differently. the patriot act now makes the prez the sole authority on who is or is not a terrorist threat.

Posted by: annie | Jul 16 2007 14:28 utc | 16

I wonder if this is Gordon Brown’s very roundabout way of stuffing Bliar.
The Russian govt supermiffed at this bullshit, is part of the Quartet that is considering what Bliar’s mooted role as Middle East peacemaker might be. Supermiffed Russians perhaps not likely to accede to Bliar getting any role as part of tit-for-tat.
Also wonder if Gordon is thinking about handing Berez over to the Brazilians. Would get Berez off British soil, where he is increasingly a nuisance, without the indignity of handing him back to the Russians. Make big fuss about need to honour intl agreements on extradition (do Blightly and Brazil have extradition treaty?), then accede to Brazil’s need to talk to Berez about his role in football corruption. Bizarre, but it might work.

Posted by: Dismal Science | Jul 17 2007 12:06 utc | 17