Some false articles on the version of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia

[Alex Him]

Excerpts from Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova, Moscow, February 22, 2017



Launching a special section dedicated to fake news on the Foreign Ministry’s official website



To develop the initiative I mentioned during the press briefing on February 15, I direct your attention to the new section of the Foreign Ministry’s official website, which will feature examples of published materials that contain false information about Russia. Today we are launching this section, which will be available on the website.

The first collection of such “news” has already been published. You can read them on the website in the Press Service section – Articles and Rebuttals – Published materials that contain false information about Russia. The section will feature bogus propaganda stories by various media sources and provide links to them.

Unfortunately, this section will be updated regularly. Of course, not every fake news story will be published there. The objective is to show the main trends in publishing fake news about our country and to try to stop their spread.

We work with foreign correspondents on a permanent and regular basis. You know where to find us and how to reach us by phone or email. If foreign correspondents have any suggestions for this section, or if they want to provide proof of their news stories so that they are removed from the website, please send us your additional materials. Please call, write, visit. We will address the information you publish.






Anti-fake news section on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s website



Question:

Why has the Foreign Ministry decided to create an anti-fake news section on its website?



Maria Zakharova:

First, we have to speak at nearly all briefings about materials that include or promote unreliable information or information that is published again and again even though we have refuted it some time ago. Second, in addition to making comments on the situation at large, we consider it necessary to say that this or that topic is an example of stovepiping as part of an anti-Russia information campaign and to cite concrete materials in this respect. I believe the public must know its “heroes”. It is one thing to comment on a situation, but it is quite another matter when we provide the names of media outlets and journalists who are involved.

We fully respect media freedom. It was a choice of principle made by our country. We have a legal framework regarding this, and we not just respect media freedom but also journalists’ opinions even when we do not agree with them. Unfortunately, it is a fact that information campaigns are waged to promote false information planted for this purpose. There were elements of information warfare and information aggression last time I checked. Fake news has become a global trend. Paradoxically, Russia is regularly accused of engaging in this. I am referring to government agencies and media. All international media outlets use the same method when providing unreliable information about Russia – they do not provide facts. This is the saddest and probably the most paradoxical element. A great deal of information is published, but never concrete facts.

On top of everything, a focus on entirely anonymous leaks represents a new component of this narrative. We are unaware of who is behind them, so no one can be held accountable. Meanwhile, the media tend to make major and far-reaching conclusions based on this information.

There’s another angle to it. Look at what’s happening: first, some information is put out there in the form of leaks coming from unnamed high-ranking sources, or they even go as far as publishing official opinions without providing any reliable information. All of that trickles down from major to smaller media, and from print media to television. After that, everything spreads across the internet at breakneck speed. Public opinion is formed. Two to three months later, a correction is published. However, the damage caused by this unverified information or misinformation is enormous, because the information has reached everyone through print and online media. The correction is therefore pointless.

I often cite an example that you are familiar with regarding Russian submarines in Northern Europe. This is a very similar approach where information is published citing anonymous sources in several countries about Russian submarines surfacing someplace and threatening to do something awful, and so on. No data or facts are provided, and no one can be made accountable for that. Six months later that same publication, in order to legally absolve itself of responsibility, publishes a one-line correction to the effect that it was not a submarine, but a fragment or the debris of a ship or a regular boat. However, no one is interested in the news any longer. No one is anxious to spread it. Probably, only Russia is interested in it telling everyone that they are issuing a correction now. But the effect is zero. All of that goes on and on. This submarine scare has lasted for decades. Talk about a sustained trend.

We started this section in order to provide specific examples. We're not pioneers in this regard, nor have we come up with anything new. I reiterate that we are open to a dialogue. If a publication, an editorial board, or reporters decide that their article was posted there without grounds and provide us with the information which would corroborate their assertions, we will certainly take it into consideration. We are open to communication. However, things like what happened in Montenegro simply cannot be. After all, we are constantly refuting the information. With more planted stories making their way to the press, our rebuttals, which we made many times, were not even noticed.






Fake news



Question:

Will the Russian Foreign Ministry’s site post Russian articles, for example, about a boy crucified in Slavyansk, in its “fake news” section? There are frequent situations when the positions of our, your and other correspondents differ a lot. For example, three years ago I was told in Crimea that the “green men” are Russian troops but the official stance was different. Or, for example, that a Russian Buk shot the Malaysian Boeing.



Maria Zakharova:

When were you last in Donbass? Tell me, who has ever been to Donbass? You are speaking about the situation in the south of Ukraine, but those foreign colleagues who were there can be counted on the fingers of one hand.



Question:

I’ve been there many times, as long as I was allowed to enter. Alexander Zakharchenko promised that if I called him, they would let me in. I called him three times and they didn’t.

If there’s a report that has me stating our opinion and proving that this is indeed the case, but you say that it isn’t, that it’s fake news, what about it then?



Maria Zakharova:

Look how everyone has sat up. Frankly, I didn’t even expect this kind of furore. This only goes to show that we’re doing everything just right. I didn’t even think that everyone would be so concerned. If you don’t publish fake news, why then does it worry you so? This means you have no chance of winding up there. I don’t see what the problem is.

As for reports in the Russian media, as you understand, the Foreign Ministry is involved in foreign policy. We are the agency that, under Russian law, works with foreign correspondents. We issue accreditation and actually work with foreign reporters. Our task is to refute information that is published in foreign media outlets. This is part of our job description. I can tell you – maybe you were not present in this room – it’s a subsection of a large section that is related to rebuttals. If you click on it you will see that we regularly refute materials that, in our opinion, in one way or another are untrue and were published in Russian media outlets. Don’t worry about your Russian colleagues. An appropriate spot is always allotted to them there.

Now you’ve taken this news too close to heart. Tell me, did you react in the same way to the reports that such sections were launched long ago in the media resources of European agencies that are overseen by Brussels? Do you ask them the same questions when they post information about the Russian media? Have you asked them about the criteria they use in selecting materials for publication? We asked this question and were told there are no criteria. We asked them to provide information or to substantiate these sections, materials and conclusions with concrete information. We received nothing. I can tell you more. It’s unfair to rebuke me over the fact that Mr Zakharchenko did not respond to your call three times in a row. However, I believe that when they hear today about your difficulties in communicating with people in Donbass who are in charge of contacts with the press – and we are live on the air – they will pay attention to you. So come more often and get it off your chest. You’ll be heard.

How responsive everyone always is to foreign correspondents’ concerns! How sensitive they are! In particular, yesterday a question was asked regarding the investigation into the case involving Swedish reporters. Foreign Minister Lavrov provided exhaustive information. The Information and Press Department could have provided all details to the Swedish correspondent but she decided to do so at the news conference, not in the regular course of work, as is common practice with many. How acutely this pain is felt when foreign correspondents are concerned! Don’t put it into the “fake news” section. Don’t strip them of accreditation. Of course, investigations are necessary. Why are you not just as sensitive and responsive to these problems where your Russian colleagues are involved? You don’t consider them your colleagues? You don’t regard people who have worked for years in Syria, where there is not a single Western correspondent, as professionals? Do you think all of this is fabricated? Every time we report on what we find in Aleppo. Why is this information reported only in the Russian media, but does not get through to you?

And another point. Look how many Russian correspondents were expelled from European countries. They are denied admittance to events they plan to cover. They have accreditation problems. A large number of TV channels in a number of countries were blocked due to their disagreement with the official position in these countries. Is this information reported in your media? No? Why? These are your colleagues. This is still about freedom of expression. It’s indivisible. There can’t be more of it or less of it. If you judge us, why don’t you judge yourselves?

Finally, a very important aspect. Today we sent a letter signed by the Information and Press Department director to OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatović enumerating and specifying our concerns related to the infringement on Russian media rights. We not only lodge complaints but we also provide her and her institution with information about her concerns. For example, she asks us how the investigation of a particular case is proceeding, and we provide her the required information.

I’d like to give you one example. More than a year ago, we sent an official note from the Russian Foreign Ministry to the EU permanent mission in Moscow requesting information about the procedure for the accreditation of Russian correspondents abroad. Do you think we received an answer? No. When Russian correspondents are expelled or denied entry to European countries, we are told that they violated accreditation rules. We officially requested information about the accreditation procedure and visa requirements for foreign correspondents, in particular from Russia, so that they could work in EU territory. There was no response. And there is a whole foreign mission working here! How’s that? We constantly hear and there’ve been a number of materials written by your colleagues alleging that Russia has a non-transparent and undemocratic accreditation system for foreign correspondents. Well, well! All documents on the accreditation procedure are posted on our website. This law has been “at work” for many years. It was signed under President Yeltsin and has not been amended once. It’s available. What’s more, we reply to all questions practically in manual mode. Only once did we request the necessary documents from the EU to know the accreditation procedure for our correspondents so that they are not expelled. You see what I mean? These are not even double standards. This is simply playing on another chessboard.

I will say for the third time today what if some media outlets, which find their materials in the new section, have any questions and they provide us the relevant information, what problems can there be? We will look into their situation. The problem, however, is that the exact opposite is happening. When we see fake news (it is not our term; we did not make it up; we did not launch this campaign; it was a “mainstream” word in the presentations of all of our Western colleagues at the Munich conference), we write or try to get in touch with a corresponding media outlet and state our position. Unfortunately, very often no one wants to reflect Russia’s official line. Let’s try doing it in reverse. If you have complaints, write and we will simply change something. Let’s swap places and you will see how hard it is to prove that you’re right.



Question:

Will you please repeat that. If a journalist or correspondent says he thinks the Malaysian Boeing was shot down by a Russian Buk, will the journalist be posted on that site section or not?



Maria Zakharova:

You are perfectly aware that journalists and media outlets are responsible for what they publish. This is not something seen in a dream. Surely, if you claim something, there must be some materials and data to support the claim. We are not speaking about social media accounts owned by individuals, we are speaking about the media. I just can’t wrap my head around the idea that such an article will come out and there will be no arguments. Can this happen?

We have already launched the section of the website. We are awaiting your response. Please write, call, provide information, we are ready to work with you.





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/press_service/s...ent/id/2656004

[Alex Him]

Russia Considers Returning Snowden to U.S.



20 February 2017 - 17:33







This article makes false assertions.



http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ficial-n718921





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2652656

[Alex Him]

Russia plotted to overthrow Montenegro's government



20 February 2017 - 17:51







This article makes false assertions.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...assassinating/





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2652691

[Alex Him]

Russia Deploys Missile, Violating Treaty



20 February 2017 - 17:54







This article makes false assertions.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/w...eaty.html?_r=0





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2652709

[Alex Him]

Russia Is Hacking France’s Presidential Front-Runner



20 February 2017 - 17:56







This article makes false assertions.



https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...fers-cyber-hit





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2652719

[Alex Him]

Vitaly Churkin is 5th Suspicious Death of Russian Diplomat in 3 months



22 February 2017 - 14:46







This article makes false assertions.



http://www.smobserved.com/story/2017...nths/2641.html





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2655982

[Alex Him]

Financing Syria reconstruction



27 February 2017 - 11:34







While confirming the negotiations between Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, ambassadors of EU member states and European Union Ambassador to Russia on February 8, 2017, we would like to inform the Financial Times that during the meeting the Russian side did not suggest that the EU “provide Syria with tens of billions of dollars for reconstruction.” Unfortunately, Financial Times never contacted the Foreign Ministry for a comment on this prior to publication.



https://www.ft.com/content/47933554-...6-2d969e0d3b65





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2659041

[Alex Him]

The New York Times item about fake news



1 March 2017 - 17:08







On February 23, The New York Times published an article titled “With Big Red Stamp, Russia Singles Out What It Calls ‘Fake’ News.” We are grateful to its author, Neil MacFarquhar, for his attention to the Foreign Ministry website about fake news and his desire to understand the reasons behind this important project.

It is regrettable that Mr MacFarquhar does not understand, or does not want to understand our position, as we can see from his statements that “Russia appears to be labelling as fake any articles it dislikes,” and is “creating alternative realities.” Neither statement is true. We explained our position clearly and unambiguously at the February 22 briefing.

Mr MacFarquhar’s article will be added to our new project for two reasons. First, it deliberately distorts Russia’s position. And second, it does not even mention, let alone objectively analyse similar projects by Euro-Atlantic organisations.

We reaffirm our respect for the freedom of the press and an interested exchange of opinions. We are not going to create obstacles for journalists or prohibit any publications in Russia provided they respect Russian law. Unfortunately, we see certain elements in the work of leading media outlets – and not only in the West – which experts describe as the tabloidisation of the press. This negative trend is in evidence in many countries. Experts and political scientists around the world are raising alarm over the plummeting professional standards in journalism, which explains the publication of distorted and unreliable information and sometimes blatant lies. The media community has not yet found a way to respond to this new global challenge, which is undermining the principle of free speech.

For our part, we will continue to draw attention to unreliable information about Russia’s foreign policy published in the international media. You will not get silent consent to these lies from us.

We hope The New York Times will hear our opinion and will put forth our position objectively and in detail in its articles about the Russian Foreign Ministry. We also hope that the newspaper’s journalists will fight disinformation and attempts to create alternative realities not only in Russia but also at home and in other European capitals.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/w...ministry-.html





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2662229

[Alex Him]

The BBC’s US office item titled Trump Russia dossier key claim ‘verified’



31 March 2017 - 12:48







On March 30, BBC published yet another item about our colleague, Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin, who headed the Russian Embassy’s economics division until last August. The article titled Trump Russia dossier key claim ‘verified’ alleges that Mr Kalugin was a spy and that this is proved by the so-called Steele dossier about Russia’s involvement in the US presidential election last year.

We want to once again make it quite clear that neither Mikhail Kalugin nor any other member of the Russian diplomatic service or any other agencies in the United States was connected in any way with the US presidential election and that they did not violate US laws.

Mikhail Kalugin is a career diplomat who worked in the United States for six years. His main mission was to promote bilateral economic ties. At present, he is on the Central Staff of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Contrary to what the BBC claims, during his assignment in the United States he regularly met with representatives of the US Department of State, the National Security Council and various US economic departments. Mikhail Kalugin was also engaged in the public sphere giving lectures and interviews. Responsible media representatives can check this information and publish the results of their enquiries. By the way, the BBC item claims that the State Department staff who dealt with Russia have never met Kalugin. This is a bare-faced lie. Although all official forms and methods of interaction were curtailed in 2014 at the initiative of the Obama administration, our diplomats searched for and found ways to keep our bilateral relations afloat. It is an absolutely normal practice.

We would like to repeat that this item published by the BBC is an absolutely absurd story that runs counter to the corporation’s professional principles. We believe it’s time to stop spreading these politically motivated allegations.



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39435786





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/nedostovernie-publ...ent/id/2712949

[Alex Him]

Washington Times publication about the explosion in St Petersburg metro on April 3, 2017



4 April 2017 - 12:32







We were surprised by the visual content of the Washington Times article on the St Petersburg metro explosion on April 3. What was the editors’ reasoning for placing a photo from the unauthorised rally in Moscow on March 26? We hope they did not intend to compile facts to misinform their audience. We are, however, satisfied with the prompt corrections made after our call to their Moscow office.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-injures-unkn/





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2716052

[Alex Him]

Kommersant interview with Deputy Secretary General of NATO Rose Gottemoeller, “NATO had no plans to strengthen its eastern borders before what happened in Ukraine”



4 April 2017 - 16:31







We took note of the interview by Deputy Secretary General of NATO Rose Gottemoeller, posted by the newspaper Kommersant on April 3 under a dubious headline, which is also a quote from her interview: “NATO had no plans to strengthen its eastern borders before what happened in Ukraine.”

This statement from a high-ranking representative of the alliance, in fact, ignores NATO’s rapid eastward expansion immediately after the Soviet Union collapsed, long before the recent coup in Kiev. Her subsequent statements only muddle the picture of what is happening near Russia’s borders.

In particular, the claim that all efforts of NATO members in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States are “non-threatening, defensive, and proportionate” simply is not true. After all, the matter is not confined to just four multinational battalions. These are long-term measures aimed at gaining a strategic advantage in Europe. Thus, a number of European countries will be storing advanced equipment for several US Army mechanised brigades. Staff structures are being created. The air force grouping is being built up, the aircraft of which will patrol the airspace, including above the Baltic States. The intensity of the exercises conducted by the NATO countries is increasing, and their scale is significant.

There are many concrete examples of the alliance ratcheting up military-political tensions in the vicinity of Russia's borders. Here are just a few. A US Navy destroyer, equipped with anti-ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, Tomahawk long-range strike missiles, was 30 nautical miles away from Kaliningrad. NATO ships called at the port of Odessa. The latest NATO fighter jets are based in Estonia at a distance of a 10 minute flight time to St Petersburg. Ms Gottemoeller should be asked about the true purpose of such a “peaceful” build-up of NATO's military presence near the borders of an “aggressive Russia”.How would Brussels react if Russian ships showed up within 30 miles of the US naval base in Norfolk or our planes were based within a five-minute flight from Long Island, New York?

With regard to deploying Iskander mobile missile systems in the Kaliningrad Region, we would like to point out the fact that Russia has never concealed that such military events are being carried out. The units of the missile forces were on several occasions redeployed and will be redeployed as part of the combat training plan for the Russian Armed Forces, including in the Kaliningrad Region. This happens on Russian territory and does not violate any international treaties or agreements.

Despite this latest confirmation that the leadership of the alliance is not interested in looking for ways out of the complex situation that NATO itself created, we emphasise again that we remain committed to look for ways to normalise Russia-NATO relations. The Russia-NATO Council, which has repeatedly demonstrated its relevance, continues to play a role as an important channel of interaction and a forum for discussing current issues of European security. Clearly, it is impossible to establish the necessary political foundation for dialogue without the military component. The willingness of the alliance to take into account Russian proposals on normalising relations and to engage in substantive dialogue with our country, instead of simply formally maintaining the appearance of a dialogue, are prerequisites for resuming contacts between our militaries. If the alliance continues to ignore this fact, then ultimately, as history shows, that it will negatively affect the security of all Euro-Atlantic states.




* The above quotes from the Deputy Secretary General of NATO are an example of “fake news”, as they refer to it in the West. Surprisingly, the publishing house Kommersant did not find it necessary to fact-check the interview.



http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3260420





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2716352

[Alex Him]

Apropos TOLOnews item about the alleged visit by a Russian military delegation to Taliban training camps



10 April 2017 - 16:45







We regard the April 5 publication of an item titled “Russians Visited ‘Taliban Training Сenters’ In Waziristan” on the official website of the English-language Afghan television channel as yet another lie about Russia.

The author of this item is speculating on the rumour published in the local media following a visit by a Russian military delegation led by the Deputy Chief of the Russian General Staff, Colonel General Sergey Istrakov, to Rawalpindi in Pakistan. The Russian military went there for bilateral staff consultations.

These consultations were a major element of bilateral negotiations held to develop Russian-Pakistani interaction against the threat of international terrorist groups.

Regarding the geographical aspect of this visit, we have to say that apart from holding consultations in Rawalpindi, the Russian delegation also visited Miranshah, the capital city of North Waziristan. The visit was made at the invitation of our Pakistani partners within the framework of the presentation of the results of the Pakistani Government’s counterterrorist Operation Zarb-e-Azb (Strike of the Prophet’s Sword). The delegation did not leave the city, let alone go to any Taliban training camps in the neighbouring provinces of Afghanistan. While demonstrating the effectiveness of their counterterrorist operation, our Pakistani colleagues took the Russian military to the Miranshah districts that were liberated from the terrorists. We will let the item’s authors worry about the unsubstantiated claims by witnesses who allegedly saw “the Russian delegation along with the Pakistani military” in Taliban training camps.

In conclusion, we would like to say that Russia has a sincere interest in regional peace and stability. Therefore, we will continue to provide assistance to Pakistan to strengthen its counterterrorism capability.



http://www.tolonews.com/afghanistan/...ers-waziristan





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2724651

[Alex Him]

Anti-Russian article, ‘The World Has Failed the Syrians,’ published twice by The Nation, Thailand



12 April 2017 - 11:14







We noticed the biased editorial entitled “The World Has Failed the Syrians,” published by The Nation, Thailand, on March 19 of this year. This notorious article is a selection of anti-Russian clichés related to the Syrian crisis.

One will recall that the situation existing in North Africa and the Middle East has been created by a Western policy aimed at toppling the legitimate authorities and staging “colour revolutions.” The Russian actions, on the contrary, are based on international law. The Russian Armed Forces are in Syria at the official invitation of the legitimately elected Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The results of these actions are self-evident: the financial and economic status of ISIS (a terrorist group banned in the Russian Federation) has been undermined; the Russian Centre for Reconciliation of Opposing Sides in Syria has convinced over 1,450 Syrian populated localities to join the process of national reconciliation; Syria’s important economic and cultural centres, Aleppo and Palmyra, have been cleared from terrorists.

We believe that The Nation’s attempt to resuscitate the anti-Russian concoctions related to the liberation of Aleppo in Syria are designed, among other things, to divert public attention from the monstrous humanitarian disaster in Mosul, Iraq, where the US-led coalition has been involved in a military operation for more than a year now. However, the world media, with rare exceptions, are hushing up this tragedy and stubbornly neglect numerous facts proving the suffering of peaceful civilians at the hands of ISIS terrorists and the US-led coalition.

Let us remark in conclusion that search engines produce a queer result for “The World Has Failed the Syrians.” The Nation published the article twice: on December 18, 2016, and on March 19, 2017. We would like to believe that the publication of two identical texts about Russia’s alleged role in defending the “inhuman Assad regime” is a technical slip-up rather than the intentional compliance with the formula: “Repeat a lie one thousand times and it becomes the truth.”



The publication of March 19, 2017

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news...orial/30309526

The publication of December 18, 2016

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news...orial/30302319

Letter to the editors by the Russian Ambassador to Thailand Kirill Barsky, March 22, 2017

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news...ditor/30309823





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2725116

[GoldfingerSRB]

Thanks for the thread! I really appreciate the efforts of the Russian Foreign Ministry to combat the distortions and lies, when our opponents in face of Shillary and McCain flood world media with the fake news.

Sorry for the little off-topic, but I certainly like the sense of humor in the Russian Foreign Ministry, they seems very crafty at everything. I even posted this video in SF Russia, local Zionist fools didn't understand anything, it only means freaks like Poison do not even speak Russian:

Супер Ñ�тёб от МИДа Ð*Ф: «Ð�втоответчик длÑ� роÑ�Ñ�ийÑ�ких дипломатичеÑ�ких миÑ�Ñ�ий»

Супер Ñ�тёб от МИДа Ð*Ф: «Ð�втоответчик длÑ� роÑ�Ñ�ийÑ�ких дипломатичеÑ�ких миÑ�Ñ�ий»

Take a note, the video was created by News Front, the informational project of South-East front, their goal is truthful news from Novorussia, Russia, Serbia, Bulgary and Moldova.

[Alex Him]

These are old articles.
I saw them in the Russian sector of the site but could not find in the English sector.
Now I accidentally found them.




A fake Facebook page of the Russian Embassy in the Czech Republic



14 April 2017 - 15:35







We have noticed the appearance of a fake page of the Russian Embassy in the Czech Republic in the Czech segment of Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/ambasadaRF/. Here are our comments on this matter.

This source has no connection with the official page of Russia’s overseas diplomatic mission. Therefore, the creators of the fake resource are disseminating information on behalf of the Russian Embassy in the Czech Republic without any legal grounds, deliberately misleading Czech readers. We regard this disinformation as a sophisticated method of hybrid influence on the Czech public, highly popular with the West of late.

The official Facebook page of the Russian Embassy in the Czech Republic is located at www.facebook.com/AmbRusCZ/. A link is available on the official Embassy website at www.czech.mid.ru.





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2727082

[Alex Him]

Publication in the online Lithuanian outlet DELFI.LT: A Dizzying Career: From an ambitious press secretary in Vilnius to a Russian spy in the United States



14 April 2017 - 15:45







Another fabrication about the activities of Russian diplomats that holds no water was posted on website DELFI.LT. This piece of so-called “investigative journalism” contains a reprint of absolutely false allegations about the work of a Russian Foreign Ministry employee, career diplomat Mikhail Kalugin, who, in August 2016, completed a six-year assignment at the Russian Embassy in the United States. The official representative of the Foreign Ministry pointed out on several occasions that neither Kalugin, nor other Russian diplomats in the United States, were involved in last year's presidential race in the United States.

The Lithuanian website reprints the far-fetched allegations of some “experts on Russia,” who see a KGB officer or a spy in every Russian citizen, not to mention Russian diplomat. A recent report of the Lithuanian special services is a case in point. In it, Russia was once again portrayed as the “main threat” to the security of Lithuania, the Russian Embassy in Vilnius a “spy nest,” and its employees, special service agents posing as diplomats.

This material is interspersed with completely absurd and paranoid observations by a number of named and unnamed Lithuanian diplomats. For example, with reference to the former Lithuanian Ambassador to the United States, it is alleged that about 100 Russian diplomats based in Washington are surveilling Lithuania and other post-Soviet republics. That, in fact, is almost the entire diplomatic staff of our embassy. Who then is doing the work of maintaining relations with the Administration, the State Department and US businesses?

No less false are the allegations that Lithuanian diplomats are under targeted surveillance. That begs the question: What about the fact that these “named and unnamed Lithuanian diplomats” themselves proactively communicated with their Russian colleagues in Washington, attended receptions at our embassy, asked for meetings and spoke at the same expert panels? Does this mean that they, too, were systematically keeping tabs on Russian diplomats? The answer is simple. Clearly, the person who wrote the article and the individuals featured in the article are not aware or pretend that they are not aware of the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, according to which the functions of a diplomat include finding, using all legal means, information about the situation and the events in the host state, which also applies to that country's relations with the outside world.

Finally, the Lithuanian journalist made epically foolish conclusions based on the fact that Mr Kalugin speaks Lithuanian and was part of the Russian diplomatic mission in Lithuania. Indeed, our diplomat is a graduate of the first group of MGIMO students who studied the Lithuanian language. Indeed, immediately after graduation, he was sent to Vilnius, where he worked as press attache and made public statements on the Russian-Lithuanian dialogue. Is that not also what Lithuanian diplomats do – study foreign languages and comment on bilateral relations? What precisely, then, is the author of this “article” exposing?



http://ru.delfi.lt/news/live/golovok....d?id=74309546





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2727119

[Alex Him]

Regarding a CNN article titled ‘White House furious after being trolled with Russia Oval Office photos’



12 May 2017 - 10:14







We have been taken completely by surprise by the latest lies published by CNN on May 11 under the title “White House furious after being trolled with Russia Oval Office photos.”

CNN claims, citing its White House sources, that Moscow has again tricked Washington by posting photographs of an Oval Office meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. The author of this article alleges that the partners had agreed not to publish these photographs. He cites a White House official as saying: “They tricked us. That’s the problem with the Russians -- they lie.”

This low-grade fake has been laid bare at a briefing of a White House spokesperson held on the day of the above meeting. Replying to media questions, Sarah Sanders said without a shade of indignation that there were official photographers in the room, as it always happens when the US president meets with a foreign minister or a head of state. Moreover, she pointed out that “proper protocol was followed in this procedure.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...ah-sanders-and.

We have to say that this information blunder, far from the first in CNN’s recent history, has shown yet again that the network does not have any serious sources in the current US administration, and neither does it have a professional attitude to journalism.



http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/11/po...rump-russians/





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/nedostovernie-p...ent/id/2752197

[Ray Allan]

"Stop spreading these lies and false news. This is good advice for CNN."--Mariya Zakharova, March 2017

They don't seem to be listening.

[Alex Him]

Originally Posted by Ray Allan

"Stop spreading these lies and false news. This is good advice for CNN."--Mariya Zakharova, March 2017

They don't seem to be listening.

If they stop spreading false news, then their sponsors will stop paying money to them. Their ears are closed with money.

[Alex Him]

Regarding a Neue Zürcher Zeitung article on Russia’s alleged interference in Western election campaigns



16 May 2017 - 21:01







We are perplexed by the involvement of Neue Zurcher Zeitung in the campaign to accuse Russia of intervention in Western election campaigns. On May 13, the Swiss newspaper published an article titled “Putin is waging war on the West.”

The author claims that Russian hackers in the employ of special services interfered in the election campaigns in the United States and France. Their next target is the parliamentary election in Germany, Andreas Ruesch writes.

He refers to “lots of circumstantial evidence” and cites the opinion of Western security services and unidentified software developers. At the same time, he admits that it is impossible to identify the source of the cyberattacks with absolute certainty. And yet, Mr Ruesch blames Moscow for the hacking attacks that discredited the Democratic candidates.

This means that Neue Zurcher Zeitung has joined the host of other media outlets that have abandoned the fundamental principles of professional journalism, such as objective and unbiased reporting, to wage an open information war against Russia. The author of the article in question based his unsubstantiated accusations against Russia on circumstantial evidence, the opinion of security services and his personal perceptions. This is nothing but undisguised mudslinging.

Such publications are primarily damaging the positive image of the Swiss media, which have been regarded until recently as an important social institution committed to the principles of neutrality and dialogue based on mutual respect.

Russia has always advocated respect for international law. We reiterate once again that Russia is not involved in hacking attacks.



https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/einmischu...ten-ld.1292843







The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/nedostovernie-publ...ent/id/2757840